摘要：Licensed hairdressing facilities are prevalent in communities nationwide and represent a unique and promising channel for delivering public health interventions. The Rhode Island Smokefree Shop Initiative tested the feasibility of using these facilities to deliver smoking policy interventions statewide. A statewide survey of hairdressing facilities was followed by interventions targeted to the readiness level (high/low) of respondents to adopt smoke-free policies. THE RHODE ISLAND SMOKEfree Shop Initiative (SSI) involved a 2-phase effort. First, a questionnaire was mailed to 1319 licensed hairdressing facilities to determine their smoking policies; 349 facilities responded. Among respondents, 44% (n = 152 349) reported having a total smoking ban already in place. Multiple logistic regression analyses revealed that responding facility owners who were current smokers were 16% less likely to work in a shop with a restrictive smoking policy (odds ratio [OR] = .16; 95% confidence interval [CI] = .06, .44), and respondents who believed that environmental tobacco smoke harms health were 88% more likely to work in a shop with a restrictive smoking policy (OR = 1.88; 95% CI = 1.11, 3.20). To build the smokefree shop policy initiative, responses to 1 item on the mailed questionnaire were used to categorize the respondent's readiness to offer a more restrictive smoking policy. Thirty-eight percent of respondents without a total ban already in place (75/197) were not interested in adopting a more restrictive smoking ban and were categorized as having “low” readiness; 62% of respondents (122/197) were interested in or thinking about adopting a more restrictive smoking policy and were categorized as having “high” readiness. In the project's second phase, a smoking policy intervention was developed and tailored to shop owner self-reported readiness level (high or low) and then delivered by trained professionals according to a tested protocol. A Smokefree Shop Initiative advisory board was recruited and organized during the planning phase to help the research team understand how to work best with beauty industry representatives. Advisory board members included shop owners, hairstylists, distributors of hair products, instructors from the local beauty schools, the president of the statewide professional trade association, and consumers. Together, board members reviewed all program plans, questionnaire results, and intervention materials. Articles were placed in a quarterly trade newsletter describing the initiative's aims, resources, and upcoming events. Advisory board members were invaluable spokespersons for the initiative and offered guidance and support for all aspects of the program. Selected hairdressing facility owners from Massachusetts pretested the intervention materials before implementation in Rhode Island. The intervention was tailored to the level of owner readiness to adopt a more restrictive smoking policy. Facility respondents who reported that a total smoking ban was already in place at baseline received a congratulatory letter, a framed certificate, and free mirror stickers promoting their smoke-free status. Low-readiness facilities received a personalized cover letter, printed facts about the negative effects of smoke on beauty and health, a description of the initiative, and information about resources available if they became interested in going smoke-free at some future time. High-readiness facilities were sent all of the same materials as those with low interest and received a phone call offering a free on-site consultation with a trained member of the research team about how to go smoke-free. All high-readiness facilities also received the Smokefree Policy Guide.
