ENDS retailers and marketing near university campuses with and without tobacco-free policies
ENDS retailers and marketing near university campuses with and without tobacco-free policies
复制标题
DOI：
10.18332/tid/94600
复制
发表时间：
2018-10-01
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Henriksen, Lisa
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Barker, Dianne C.;Schleicher, Nina C.;Henriksen, Lisa
引言本研究描述了加州公立大学附近的电子尼古丁递送系统（ENDS）的零售环境，评估了ENDS零售商的第一个随机样本的营销，并比较了ENDS零售商密度和校园附近的零售营销与无烟草政策。其被绘制在加州大学和加州州立大学系统的33个校园的1-4英里内。为了评估零售商密度，对可能的ENDS零售商（n=1186）进行了电话调查，以确定谁销售电子烟或电子液体（完成率=72.9%）。为了评估零售营销，经过培训的数据收集人员在2015年秋季随机抽样（n=438，平均M=13.3每个校园的商店，SD=11.2）中完成了观察。一半的校园附近有10家或更多的ENDS零售商。大多数ENDS零售商是便利店（42.5%），更多的是总店（8.4%），而不是烟店（6.8%）或vape商店（6.2%）。近一半（43.6%）的ENDS零售商销售零尼古丁产品，13.9%销售NRT。ENDS广告在72.4%的零售商和28.1%的零售商的外部可见。然而，ENDS的外部广告的存在显着降低校园附近建立无烟政策比校园附近最近或没有无烟政策（OR=0.45，95%CI：0.22-0.94）。结论大量的烟草零售商，销售高校附近的ENDS表明，需要更好地监测和监管ENDS的可用性和营销。零尼古丁产品的广泛使用表明，有必要检查无尼古丁产品是否如广告所宣传的那样安全使用。需要进行纵向研究，以了解ENDS的零售营销如何应对附近校园无烟政策的变化。
INTRODUCTION This study characterizes the retail environment for Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) near public universities in California, assesses marketing in the first random sample of ENDS retailers, and compares ENDS retailer density and retail marketing near campuses with and without tobacco-free policies.METHODS Two data sources were used to construct a sampling frame of possible ENDS retailers, which were mapped within 1-4 miles of 33 campuses of the University of California and the California State University systems. To assess retailer density, a telephone survey of possible ENDS retailers (n=1186) determined who sold e-cigarettes or e-liquids (completion rate=72.9%). To assess retail marketing, trained data collectors completed observations in a random sample (n=438, mean M=13.3 stores per campus, SD=11.2) in the Fall of 2015.RESULTS In a telephone survey, 59.1% of retailers reported selling e-cigarettes or e-liquids. Half of the campuses had 10 or more ENDS retailers nearby. Most ENDS retailers were convenience stores (42.5%), and more were head shops (8.4%) than smoke shops (6.8%) or vape shops (6.2%). Nearly half (43.6%) of ENDS retailers sold products marketed as zero-nicotine and 13.9% sold NRT. ENDS advertising was visible in 72.4% and on the exterior of 28.1% of retailers. However, the presence of exterior advertising for ENDS was significantly lower near campuses with established tobacco-free policies than near campuses with recent or no tobacco-free policies (OR=0.45, 95% CI: 0.22-0.94).CONCLUSIONS The large number of tobacco retailers that sell ENDS near colleges suggests a need for better monitoring and regulation of ENDS availability and marketing. The widespread availability of zero-nicotine products suggests a need to examine whether nicotine-free products are as advertised and safe to use. Longitudinal research is needed to understand how retail marketing for ENDS responds to change in tobacco-free policies at nearby campuses.