ABSTRACT
Background: . Tobacco consumption in any form is a major contributor to non-communicable diseases, and it is the leading preventable cause of death worldwide. Secondhand smoke is also harmful. To halt the smoking epidemic and protect people from second-hand smoke, the Government of India enacted the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA) in 2003. Methods: . We ascertained compliance with the provisions of COTPA 2003 at 183 public places and 41 transport facilities of Shimla city from August 2017 to July 2018. Results: . Only 48% of public places had good compliance with the provisions of COTPA 2003. On average, a public place was found to be compliant with 7 of 10 key indicators of Section 4. Educational institutes and government offices had a higher rate of compliance compared to other places. Active smoking and signages signalling ban on smoking were observed in 17% and 95.6% of public places, respectively. Smoking aids (e.g. ashtrays) were observed at <10% of places. A designated smoking area was not seen at any public place. Conclusion: . Overall compliance of the Act was low with less than half the places having satisfactory compliance with Section 4. There is a need to raise awareness about the negative effects of smoking on health and environment and ensure strict adherence to the provisions of COTPA 2003.
Subject(s)
Tobacco Products , Tobacco Smoke Pollution , Cross-Sectional Studies , Educational Status , Humans , Smoking/epidemiology , Tobacco Smoke Pollution/analysisABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the compliance to Cigarette and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA) 2003 which ensures the protection of children from the adverse health effects of second hand smoke. METHODS: This cross-sectional study assessed the compliance of 32 educational institutions and 157 points of sale of Shimla city. RESULTS: About 88% of the educational institutions and mere 7.6% points of sale were found having good compliance to the key indicators. No point of sale was found within the premises of educational institutions; however, 26% were found selling tobacco products within 100 metres radius of an educational institution. 7.6% points of sale were found selling a tobacco product to children. CONCLUSIONS: Despite having the status of a smoke-free city, lapses were observed in compliance to the Act. Strict adherence to the provisions of the Act would ultimately lead to a smoke-free environment for our children.
Subject(s)
Guideline Adherence/statistics & numerical data , Smoke-Free Policy/legislation & jurisprudence , Smoking Cessation/legislation & jurisprudence , Tobacco Products/legislation & jurisprudence , Tobacco Smoke Pollution/prevention & control , Adolescent , Chi-Square Distribution , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Environmental Exposure/prevention & control , Female , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , India , Male , Public Health , Tobacco Smoke Pollution/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The documentation of magnitude of malocclusion in terms of prevalence and severity has not been done till date in Himachal Pradesh, India. AIMS: To assess the prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment needs (OTNs) among 9-and 12-year-old school children by using the Dental Aesthetic Index (DAI) in the state. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 1188 children from randomly selected schools. The survey was done according to the Oral Health Assessment Form (modified). DAI was used to assess the severity of malocclusion, along with collection of demographic data. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of malocclusion was 12.5% and required orthodontic treatment, whereas 87.5% did not require treatment. A severe malocclusion for which treatment was highly desirable was recorded in 3.1%; 8% had a definite malocclusion for which treatment was elective. Only about 1.3% had a handicapping malocclusion that needed mandatory treatment. Almost equal proportions of males and females were affected with malocclusion with the means 20 ± 4.6 and 19.9 ± 4.9, respectively (P < 0.641). The prevalence and severity of malocclusion was more in 12-year age group than in 9-year age group (P = 0.002**). There was an increase in the proportion of malocclusion among older children: In 12-year age group, 15.7% with mean 20.5 ± 5.1 and in 9-year-old children, 8.9% with the mean 19.3 ± 4.1 were in the need of orthodontic treatment. CONCLUSION: Severity and treatment needs, both are important factors in public health planning.
