"Why should care workers be any different from prison workers?" A qualitative study of second-hand smoke exposure during home-care visits and potential measures to eliminate exposure.

INTRODUCTION

Despite world-leading measures in place to protect employees from second-hand smoke exposure in workplaces in the United Kingdom, workers who deliver health and social care in private homes remain unprotected legally in this setting from second-hand smoke exposure (SHS).

METHODS

Fourteen individuals took part in either an in-depth telephone interview (n = 11) or an online focus group discussion (n = 3), including home-care workers (n = 5) and managers (n = 5) based in Lanarkshire (Scotland) and local/national policy makers (n = 4). Participants were asked about the extent to which exposure to SHS is an issue during home visits and possible additional measures that could be put in place to eliminate exposure.

RESULTS

Participants highlighted the difficulties in balancing the provision of care in a person's own home with the right of workers to be able to breathe clean air and be protected from SHS. Current strategies to reduce staff exposure to SHS during home visits were often reported as inadequate with SHS not a hazard considered by managers beyond protecting pregnant staff or those with pre-existing respiratory conditions such as asthma. Simple respiratory protective equipment (as used during the COVID-19 pandemic) was rightly identified as being ineffective. Methods such as nicotine replacement therapy and e-cigarettes were identified as potential ways to help people who smoke achieve temporary asbstinence prior to a home visit.

CONCLUSION

Implementing appropriate and proportionate measures to protect home-care workers from the harms posed by SHS should be a priority to help protect the health of this often overlooked occupational group.