The Covid-19 pandemic raises questions about the role that relationships and interactions between humans and animals play in the context of widespread social distancing and isolation measures. We aimed to investigate links between mental health and loneliness, companion animal ownership, the human-animal bond, and human-animal interactions; and to explore animal owners’ perceptions related to the role of their animals during lockdown. A cross-sectional online survey of UK residents over 18 years of age was conducted between April and June 2020. The questionnaire included validated and bespoke items measuring demographics; exposures and outcomes related to mental health, wellbeing and loneliness; the human-animal bond and human-animal interactions. Of 5,926 participants, 5,323 (89.8%) had at least one companion animal. Most perceived their animals to be a source of considerable support, but concerns were reported related to various practical aspects of providing care during lockdown. Strength of the human-animal bond did not differ significantly between species. Poorer mental health pre-lockdown was associated with a stronger reported human-animal bond (b = -.014, 95% CI [-.023 - -.005], p = .002). Animal ownership compared with non-ownership was associated with smaller decreases in mental health (b = .267, 95% CI [.079 - .455], p = .005) and smaller increases in loneliness (b = -.302, 95% CI [-.461 - -.144], p = .001) since lockdown. The human-animal bond is a construct that may be linked to mental health vulnerability in animal owners. Strength of the human-animal bond in terms of emotional closeness or intimacy dimensions appears to be independent of animal species. Animal ownership seemed to mitigate some of the detrimental psychological effects of Covid-19 lockdown. Further targeted investigation of the role of human-animal relationships and interactions for human health, including testing of the social buffering hypothesis and the development of instruments suited for use across animal species, is required.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic presents an opportunity to explore the role of animals as sources of emotional and physical support during a period when most of the population is experiencing social and environmental challenges. We investigated how companion animal owners perceived the influence of human–animal interaction on their physical and mental health during the first COVID-19 lockdown phase in the U.K., and what concerns they had regarding their animals at this time. We also explored the impact of participants’ interaction with non-companion animals during this phase. A cross-sectional online survey of U.K. residents aged over 18 was conducted between April and June 2020. The final item of the survey invited open-ended free-text responses, allowing participants to describe any experiences and/or perceptions of their human–animal relationships during the COVID-19 lockdown phase. A qualitative thematic analysis of responses was undertaken. Four main themes related to the following aspects of human–animal interactions during the COVID-19 lockdown phase were identified: the positive impact of animal ownership during the COVID-19 lockdown (e.g., amelioration of wellbeing and mental health), concerns relating to animal ownership during the COVID-19 lockdown (e.g., concerns over animals carrying the COVID-19 virus), grief and loss of an animal during the COVID-19 lockdown and the impact of engaging with non-companion animals during the COVID-19 lockdown. The findings complement and extend previous insights into the impact of human–animal interaction with both companion and non-companion animals. They also highlight the challenges of caring for an animal during the lockdown phase and indicate the need to consider the development of further targeted support strategies, such as “day care” for the companion animals of key workers in this context.

The prevalence of tobacco smoking in Germany is high (~27%). Monitoring of national patterns of smoking behaviour and data on the “real-world” effectiveness of cessation methods are needed to inform policies and develop campaigns aimed at reducing tobacco-related harm. In England, the Smoking Toolkit Study (STS) has been tracking such indicators since 2006, resulting in the adaptation of tobacco control policies. However, findings cannot be directly transferred into the German health policy context. The German Study on Tobacco Use (DEBRA: “Deutsche Befragung zum Rauchverhalten”) aims to provide such nationally representative data. In June 2016, the study started collecting data from computer-assisted, face-to-face household interviews in people aged 14 years and older. Over a period of 3 years, a total of ~36,000 respondents will complete the survey with a new sample of ~2000 respondents every 2 months (=18 waves). This sample will report data on demographics and the use of tobacco and electronic (e-)cigarettes. Per wave, about 500–600 people are expected to be current or recent ex-smokers (<12 months since quitting). This sample will answer detailed questions about smoking behaviour, quit attempts, exposure to health professionals’ advice on quitting, and use of cessation aids. Six-month follow-up data will be collected by telephone. The DEBRA study will be an important source of data for tobacco control policies, health strategies, and future research. The methodology is closely aligned to the STS, which will allow comparisons with data from England, a country with one of the lowest smoking prevalence rates in Europe (18%). This study has been registered at the German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00011322 ) on 25th November 2016.

Background: The Covid-19 pandemic raises questions about the role that relationships and interactions between humans and animals play in the context of widespread social distancing and isolation measures. We aimed to investigate links between mental health and loneliness, companion animal ownership, the human-animal bond, and human-animal interactions; and to explore animal owners’ perceptions related to the role of their animals during lockdown. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey of UK residents over 18 years of age was conducted between April and June 2020. The questionnaire included validated and bespoke items measuring demographics; exposures and outcomes related to mental health, wellbeing and loneliness; the human-animal bond and human-animal interactions. Results: Of 5,926 participants, 5,323 (89.8%) had at least one companion animal. Most perceived their animals to be a source of considerable support, but concerns were reported related to various practical aspects of providing care during lockdown. Strength of the human-animal bond did not differ significantly between species. Poorer mental health pre-lockdown was associated with a stronger reported human-animal bond (b = -.014, 95% CI [-.023 - -.005], p = .002). Animal ownership compared with non-ownership was associated with smaller decreases in mental health (b = .267, 95% CI [.079 - .455], p = .005) and smaller increases in loneliness (b = -.302, 95% CI [-.461 - -.144], p = .001) since lockdown. Conclusion: The human-animal bond is a construct of potential clinical importance to identify mental health vulnerability in animal owners. Animal ownership appeared to mitigate some of the detrimental psychological effects of lockdown. Further targeted investigation of the role of human-animal relationships and interactions for human health, including testing of the social buffering hypothesis and the development of instruments suited for use across animal species, is required.

Objectives: Exposing children to secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS) causes significant harm and occurs predominantly through smoking by caregivers in the family home. We report a trial of a complex intervention designed to reduce secondhand smoke exposure of children whose primary caregiver feels unable or unwilling to quit smoking.Design: An open-label, parallel, randomised controlled trial.Setting: Deprived communities in Nottingham City and County, EnglandParticipants: Caregivers resident in Nottingham City and County in England who were at least 18 years old, the main caregiver of a child aged under 5 years living in their household, and reported that they were smoking tobacco inside their home.Interventions: We compared a complex intervention combining personalised feedback on home air quality, behavioural support and nicotine replacement therapy for temporary abstinence with usual care.Main outcomes: The primary outcome was change in air quality in the home, measured as average 16–24 hours levels of particulate matter of < 2.5 µm diameter (PM_2.5), between baseline and 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included changes in maximum PM_2.5, proportion of time PM_2.5 exceeded WHO recommended levels of maximum exposure of 25 µg/mg³, child salivary cotinine, caregivers’ cigarette consumption, nicotine dependence, determination to stop smoking, quit attempts and quitting altogether during the intervention.Results: Arithmetic mean PM_2.5 decreased significantly more (by 35.2 %; 95% CI 12.7% to 51.9 %) in intervention than in usual care households, as did the proportion of time PM_2.5 exceeded 25 µg/mg³, child salivary cotinine concentrations, caregivers’ cigarette consumption in the home, nicotine dependence, determination to quit and likelihood of having made a quit attempt.Conclusions: By reducing exposure to SHS in the homes of children who live with smokers unable or unwilling to quit, this intervention offers huge potential to reduce children’s’ tobacco-related harm.Trial registration number: ISRCTN81701383.This trial was funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR): RP-PG-0608-10020

Background and Aims: Admission to a smoke‐free setting presents a unique opportunity to encourage smokers to quit. However, risk of relapse post‐discharge is high, and little is known about effective strategies to support smoking cessation following discharge. We aimed to identify interventions that maintain abstinence following a smoke‐free stay and determine their effectiveness, as well as the probable effectiveness of behaviour change techniques (BCTs) used in these interventions. Methods: Systematic review and meta‐analyses of studies of adult smokers aged ≥ 18 years who were temporarily or fully abstinent from smoking to comply with institutional smoke‐free policies. Institutions included prison, inpatient mental health, substance misuse or acute hospital settings. A Mantel–Haenszel random‐effects meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted using biochemically verified abstinence (7‐day point prevalence or continuous abstinence). BCTs were defined as ‘promising’ in terms of probable effectiveness (if BCT was present in two or more long‐term effective interventions) and feasibility (if BCT was also delivered in ≥ 25% of all interventions). Results: Thirty‐seven studies (intervention n = 9041, control n = 6195) were included: 23 RCTs (intervention n = 6593, control n = 5801); three non‐randomized trials (intervention n = 845, control n = 394) and 11 cohort studies ( n = 1603). Meta‐analysis of biochemically verified abstinence at longest follow‐up (4 weeks–18 months) found an overall effect in favour of intervention [risk ratio (RR) = 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.08–1.49, I ² = 42%]. Nine BCTs (including ‘pharmacological support’, ‘goal‐setting (behaviour)’ and ‘social support’) were characterized as ‘promising’ in terms of probable effectiveness and feasibility. Conclusions: A systematic review and meta‐analyses indicate that behavioural and pharmacological support is effective in maintaining smoking abstinence following a stay in a smoke‐free institution. Several behaviour change techniques may help to maintain smoking abstinence up to 18 months post‐discharge.