Lazovich DeAnn, Forster Jean, Widome Rachel, VanCoevering Pam
Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55454, USA.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2007 Jan;9 Suppl 1:S57-64. doi: 10.1080/14622200601083475.
State youth access laws often include restrictions for minor possession, use, or purchase of tobacco (PUP). The Minnesota PUP law allows cited youth to attend a tobacco diversion program in lieu of fines. We surveyed county attorneys in all counties (N = 87), tobacco diversion program coordinators (N = 47), and adolescents (N = 3,377) to assess PUP enforcement level, tobacco diversion program quality, and youth awareness of and experience with PUP laws and penalties. Although almost all county attorneys reported enforcement of the law, mean citation rates were low (9.3/1,000 youth) but somewhat higher in counties with tobacco diversion programs than in counties without such programs. Program coordinators also reported low attendance (Mdn = 30 adolescents per year per program). Almost 70% of classes were 2 h or less, and just 21.3% included multiple sessions; little variation in program approach or materials was observed, nor did programs meet criteria recommended for effective smoking cessation programs in this population. Overall, 59% of adolescents (79% among smokers) reported having heard of adolescents being caught by police or at school for smoking. Smoking prevalence was lower in counties with tobacco diversion programs than in counties without such programs (11.6% vs. 14.6%; adjusted OR = 0.8, 95% CI = 0.6-1.1). Receipt of a citation and attendance in a special class were more commonly reported among past-month smokers who lived in counties with tobacco diversion programs; the association for class attendance reached statistical significance. Our adolescent data provide some support for PUP laws as a potential tobacco control strategy, yet low citation rates and attendance in diversion programs of limited scope reduce the likelihood of detecting any benefit associated with this approach.
州青少年烟草获取法律通常包括对未成年人持有、使用或购买烟草(PUP)的限制。明尼苏达州的PUP法律允许被传唤的青少年参加烟草转移项目以替代罚款。我们对所有县的县检察官(N = 87)、烟草转移项目协调员(N = 47)和青少年(N = 3377)进行了调查,以评估PUP执法水平、烟草转移项目质量以及青少年对PUP法律和处罚的知晓度与经历。尽管几乎所有县检察官都报告了该法律的执行情况,但平均传唤率较低(每1000名青少年中有9.3人),不过在设有烟草转移项目的县比没有此类项目的县略高。项目协调员也报告了低参与率(每个项目每年的中位数为30名青少年)。几乎70%的课程时长为2小时或更短,只有21.3%的课程包含多节;未观察到项目方法或材料有太大差异,这些项目也未达到针对该人群有效戒烟项目所推荐的标准。总体而言,59%的青少年(吸烟者中为79%)报告听说过青少年因吸烟被警察或学校抓住。设有烟草转移项目的县的吸烟率低于没有此类项目的县(11.6%对14.6%;调整后的OR = 0.8,95% CI = 0.6 - 1.1)。在设有烟草转移项目的县,过去一个月内吸烟的青少年中更常报告收到传唤并参加特别课程;参加课程的关联具有统计学意义。我们的青少年数据为PUP法律作为一种潜在的烟草控制策略提供了一些支持,但低传唤率和范围有限的转移项目参与率降低了发现与该方法相关的任何益处的可能性。