Table 4.
Respondents’ views on policy implementation and impact – percentage agreement for non-smokers and smokers
|
Statement |
% Agreement (Strongly Agree/Agree) |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All respondents | Non-smokers | Smokers | Significance – Pearson χ2 (2 tailed) | |
| Most patients have been prepared for smoking cessation before they arrive at the hospital |
38.1 |
40.4 |
28.6 |
χ2 = 3.84; df = 2; P = 0.146 |
| Being in a totally smoke-free environment makes patient care easier |
57.0 |
63.7 |
21.4 |
χ2 = 9.36; df = 2; P = 0.009 |
| The smoke-free policy has made patient behaviour more difficult to manage |
23.8 |
22.2 |
30.8 |
χ2 = 4.96; df = 2; P = 0.084 |
| Mental health patients who are not allowed to smoke become more aggressive and hard to manage |
19.8 |
16.5 |
38.5 |
χ2 = 8.29; df = 2; P = 0.016 |
| Mental health patients who smoke are unlikely to ever quit long term |
40.6 |
37.4 |
61.5 |
χ2 = 2.79; df = 2; P = 0.247 |
| Living in the smoke-free hospital has had a positive effect on the health of patients. |
85.5 |
88.6 |
61.5 |
χ2 = 6.87; df = 2; P = 0.032 |
| Working in a smoke-free environment has had a positive impact on my health | 79.0 | 86.8 | 23.1 | χ2 = 29.37; df = 2; p < 0.001 |