Introduction
To counter the high prevalence of flavored tobacco use among youth, many U.S. localities
have passed policies that restrict youth access to these products. This study aims
to evaluate the short-term impact of a flavored tobacco restriction policy on youth
access to, and use of, flavored tobacco products in a Massachusetts community.
Methods
A community with the policy (Lowell) was matched to a community without the policy
(Malden) with similar demographics, retailer characteristics, and point-of-sale tobacco
policies. Product inventories were assessed in tobacco retailers in the 2 communities,
and surveys were administered to high school–aged youth in those communities. Inventories
and surveys were conducted around the time the policy took effect in October 2016
(baseline) and approximately 6 months later (follow-up); all data were analyzed in
2017. Chi-squared tests and difference-in-difference models were used to estimate
the impact of the policy on flavored tobacco availability and youth perceptions and
behaviors related to flavored tobacco use.
Results
Flavored tobacco availability decreased significantly in Lowell from baseline to follow-up
periods by 70 percentage points (p<0.001), whereas no significant changes in flavored tobacco availability were seen
in Malden. In addition, current use of both flavored and non-flavored tobacco decreased
in Lowell, but increased in Malden from baseline to follow-up; these changes were
significantly different between communities (flavored tobacco: −5.7%, p=0.03; non-flavored tobacco: −6.2%, p=0.01).
Conclusions
Policies that restrict the sale of flavored tobacco have the potential to curb youth
tobacco use in as few as 6 months.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to American Journal of Preventive MedicineAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
REFERENCES
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act-An Overview.www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/rules-regulations-and-guidance/family-smoking-prevention-and-tobacco-control-act-overview. Updated January 17, 2018. Accessed June 26, 2019.
- Flavored tobacco product use among youth and young adults: what if flavors didn't exist?.Tob Regul Sci. 2017; 3: 168‒173
- Flavored tobacco product use among middle and high school students‒United States, 2014.MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015; 64: 1066‒1070
- Changes in flavored tobacco use among current youth tobacco users in the United States, 2014‒2017.JAMA Pediatr. 2019; 173: 282-284
- Flavored tobacco product use in youth and adults: findings from the first wave of the PATH Study (2013‒2014).Am J Prev Med. 2017; 53: 139‒151
- Flavored electronic cigarette use and smoking among youth.Pediatrics. 2016; 138e20162513
- Disparities in tobacco marketing and product availability at the point of sale: results of national study.J Prev Med. 2017; 105: 381‒388
- Convenience store visits by US adolescents: rationale for healthier retail environments.Health Place. 2015; 34: 63‒66
- Exploration of the link between tobacco retailers in school neighborhoods and student smoking.J Sch Health. 2013; 83: 112‒118
- Youth tobacco use in Massachusetts: survey results from 1995 to 2017.2019 (Accessed July 29, 2019In: Published)
- Local policies restricting flavored ‘other tobacco products’ (OTP) to adult-only retailers.Massachusetts Municipal Association, 2019http://mhoa.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Muni-List-Flavored-OTP-Restriction-C754e.pdf(Published April 24)Date accessed: June 26, 2019
Kingsley M, Song G, Robertson J, P Henley, WWS Ursprung. Impact of flavoured tobacco restriction policies on flavoured product availability in Massachusetts. Tob Control. In press. Online February 18, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054703.
- New York City flavoured tobacco product sales ban evaluation.Tob Control. 2017; 26: 78‒84
CounterTools. Counter store audit center. https://assess.countertools.org/. Accessed December 10, 2018.
Dean AG, Sullivan KM, Soe MM. OpenEpi: Open Source Epidemiologic Statistics for Public Health, Version 3.01. www.OpenEpi.com. Accessed August 28, 2018; Updated 2013.
- The Epidemiology of Tobacco Use Among Young People in the United States and Worldwide. Preventing Tobacco Use Among Youth and Young Adults: a Report of the Surgeon General.HHS, CDC, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, Atlanta, GA2012
- A tale of two cities: exploring the retail impact of flavoured tobacco restrictions in the twin cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul, Minnesota.Tob Control. 2019; 28: 176‒180
- Adolescent smoking behavior: measures of social norms.Am J Prev Med. 2003; 25: 165‒166
- Do local tobacco regulations influence perceived social norms? Evidence from adult and youth surveys in Massachusetts.Health Educ Res. 2008; 23: 709‒722
- Lowell walk Score®.Published 2019www.walkscore.com/MA/LowellDate accessed: June 26, 2019
- Menthol: putting the pieces together.Tob Control. 2011; 20: ii1‒ii7
Article info
Publication history
Published online: October 24, 2019
Identification
Copyright
© 2019 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
