Use of a Living Lab Approach to Implement a Smoke-Free Campus Policy.

While universities have increasingly become tobacco-/smoke-free, to our knowledge, no campus has reported 100% policy compliance. Innovative approaches to encourage compliance and ongoing data collection are needed. This paper describes actions undertaken, framed within a Living Lab (LL) approach, to implement smoke-free campus policies in an Irish university. The action research comprised student-collected data on observed smoking on campus to evaluate adherence and compliance, first to a smoke-free zones policy (June 2016-March 2018), and then to a smoke-free campus policy (March 2019-February 2020). From June 2016-February 2020, 2909 smokers were observed. Adherence, defined as the average reduction in number of observed smokers from baseline in May 2016, reduced by 79% from 5.7 to 4.9 . Compliance, defined as the proportion of smokers who complied when reminded of the policy, was 90% (2610/2909). Additional activities included development of a broader health promotion programme; identification of a pattern of 'social smoking'; and promoting increased awareness of the environmental harms of tobacco. Ongoing policy implementation is essential for smoke-free policies and should include data collection and evaluation. Actions framed within the characteristics of a LL achieved fewer observed smokers. A LL approach is recommended to encourage policy adherence and compliance.

Developing a health promoting university in Trinity College Dublin-overview and outline process evaluation.

Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have the potential to impact positively on the health and wellbeing of their staff and students. Using and expanding on the 'health promoting university' (HPU) platform within HEIs, this article provides a description of 'Healthy Trinity', which is an initiative underway in Trinity College Dublin, the University of Dublin. First, Healthy Trinity is contextualized in background literature including international and national policy and practice. Second, an overview of Healthy Trinity is provided including its vision and goals. Third, the article describes the steps taken relating to the identification of stakeholders and use of a network and a co-lead model. Within this approach, the article describes a partnership approach whereby responsibilities regarding health and wellbeing are shared by individuals and the institution. Fourth, the design and implementation of Healthy Trinity is discussed by taking a 'settings approach', in which the emphasis for change is placed on individual behaviours, environment, policy and organizational culture. Consideration is given to the interplay between intervention, implementation strategy and context for successful systemic implementation. The fifth element presented is the early-stage challenges encountered during implementation, such as the need to secure recurrent funding and the importance of having a direct input to the governance of the University to enable systemic change. The sixth and final component of the article is an outline of Healthy Trinity's intention to utilize a process evaluation of the early implementation phases of this complex intervention within a settings approach. Potential deliverables and impacts of this HPU initiative are presented and discussed.

Universities, such as Trinity College Dublin, the University of Dublin, can be looked at as a community of staff and students. The university community has needs in terms of health and wellbeing. 'Healthy Trinity' attempted to build strategies and practices to meet these needs for its community. The approach taken was from multiple angles and involved students and staff, focusing on both individual and organizational responsibility to promote and encourage healthy behaviours. Healthy Trinity achieved some successes as well as encountering some challenges. This article explores how the university might build upon the successes of Healthy Trinity in order to embed a culture which prioritizes health and wellbeing for the entire university community. The article also looks at the broader impact of achieving this goal, namely the University's contribution to a healthier community beyond the university setting.

Development and proposed evaluation of an eHealth learning tool for undergraduate university students in Ireland.

Undergraduate university students are at a critical stage of development in terms of their academic, social, psychological and behavioural health. Patterns established during these formative years can last a lifetime. eHealth tools have the potential to be engaging, convenient and accessible to a wide range of students by providing health information and enhancing the uptake of positive health behaviours. The 'Healthy Trinity Online Tool' (H-TOT) was developed in collaboration with students and a transdisciplinary team with decades of experience between them in terms of research, clinical responsibility and service delivery. Developmental steps undertaken included: a literature review to formulate the topic content choices; a survey of students to check the relevance and suitability of topics identified; and, the tacit experience of the development team. This co-design model led to the development of content encompassing academic life, healthy eating, physical activity, mood, financial matters, alcohol, tobacco, drugs and relaxation. Qualitative focus groups were subsequently conducted for in-depth exploration of the usage and functionality of H-TOT. The theoretical underpinnings include the locus of control and social cognitive theory. Evidence-based behavioural change techniques are embedded throughout. During early pre-piloting of H-TOT, the team identified and solved content functionality problems. The tone of the content was also revised to ensure it was non-judgemental. To make the H-TOT as interactive as possible, video scenarios were included and all content was audio-recorded to allow playback for students with visual or learning difficulties. Evaluation plans for the pilot year of H-TOT are outlined.

A peer-led survey of student alcohol Behaviours and motives in undergraduate students.

BACKGROUND: This study examines Irish undergraduate students' behaviours and motives regarding alcohol consumption. The study explores both levels and patterns of consumption. METHOD: A cross-sectional design using a convenience sample of (n = 213) students from a selection of different courses in Health Sciences at Trinity College Dublin was used to obtain this data. The study used a peer-led approach to design and data collection. Peer-led research is emerging as a robust methodology. Evidence supports it as an effective approach, particularly with sensitive questions, which may be shared with more ease between persons with common interests and experiences. RESULTS: In terms of alcohol consumption levels and patterns, of those who drank almost three quarters (149/71%) met the threshold for binge drinking (i.e. six of more consecutive drinks in one session). Males (n = 36/73.4%) were more likely than females (n = 113/69.7%) to binge drink. Moreover, one in 5 males (n = 10/20.4%) said that they drank ten or more drinks in one session. Males were more likely to drink for conformity reasons. Despite this, a significant proportion (69.2%) of participants reported alcohol-related problems. The Drinking Motives Questionnaire-Revised (DMQR) results showed that overall students were more likely to drink for social and enhancement reasons rather than coping or conformity reasons, consistent with other studies. Nonetheless, males in the current study were more likely to drink for conformity reasons. CONCLUSION: Given the high rates of hazardous drinking, the development of an alcohol intervention may be justified, given the high response rates to peer-screening, a peer-led intervention for alcohol-related harms may yield positive results.

Not really a smoker? A study on the prevalence of and attitudes to occasional social smoking in a third level institution in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Occasional smoking is defined as any smoking occurring on a less than daily basis. Social smoking, i.e. smoking primarily in social contexts, is a sub-group of occasional smoking. Data on occasional cigarette smoking and the subset of social smoking among third level students are limited. OBJECTIVES: (1) To determine prevalence of occasional/social smoking among third level students in an Irish university; (2) to evaluate students' attitudes to occasional/social smoking, including perceived benefits and harm; (3) to explore when students commenced occasional/social smoking, their reasons and continued smoking habits; and (4) to determine any influence of other factors, e.g. alcohol consumption, on occasional/social smoking. METHODS: An anonymous online survey was distributed to undergraduates and postgraduates, using SurveyMonkey. Data were analysed in Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: Of 18,407 students surveyed, 1310 (7.1%) responded;1267 (96.7%) provided adequate data for analysis. Of the 1267 students, 423 (33.4%) self-reported as current smokers of whom 106/1267 (8.4%) self-classified as daily smokers and 317/1267 (25%) as occasional smokers. The 25% of occasional smokers comprised 266/1267 (21%) social smokers and 51/1267 (4%) non-social smokers. Occasional smokers tended to start smoking earlier and think less about quitting than daily smokers. Of 423 current smokers, 386 (97.2%) reported that alcohol increased their smoking habits. CONCLUSION: Prevalence of self-reported occasional smoking among university students was higher than daily smoking. Most occasional smokers primarily smoked in social contexts. All current smokers reported that alcohol increased cigarette intake. Effective intervention campaigns tailored to determinants of occasional/social smoking are needed as part of induction to third level.