O'Connell Madison, Kephart Lindsay
Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Office of Statistics and Evaluation, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Health Promot Pract. 2022 Jan;23(1):51-63. doi: 10.1177/1524839920963691. Epub 2020 Nov 7.
In response to rising rates of youth vaping and e-cigarette use, states and localities in the United States have adopted various tobacco control policies and have extended their utility to these emerging products. However, the extent to which these policies have been evaluated for their impact on youth use is unknown.
Two databases (PubMed, Google Scholar) were searched for English language peer-reviewed articles pertaining to electronic cigarette policy evaluation between 2009 and 2020. Primary articles of interest were journal articles that evaluated an e-cigarette policy. Secondary articles of interest were journal articles that identified any e-cigarette policy action without a formal evaluation component, those that evaluated tobacco policy, or those that described e-cigarette behaviors and trends. Tertiary articles included gray literature that provided context for e-cigarette trends and additional policy identification.
The final sample consisted of 12 relevant articles with an e-cigarette policy evaluation component and 62 relevant articles without such component, and 19 gray literature sources. Findings were synthesized based on policy type: product classification, age restrictions, smoke-free policies, flavor bans, sales restrictions, taxation, packaging, and advertising.
Policies that address access and use of e-cigarettes are common on the federal, state, and local level, are mostly reactionary, and mimic tobacco control efforts. Few policies have been formally evaluated for their effectiveness in reducing or preventing youth vaping. Strengthening the evidence base should be a priority for researchers going forward, given the potential of these policies to intervene on social and environmental conditions that affect youth initiation and uptake.
为应对青少年吸电子烟和使用电子烟的比率不断上升的情况,美国各州和地方已采取各种烟草控制政策,并将其应用范围扩大到这些新兴产品。然而,这些政策对青少年使用的影响在多大程度上得到评估尚不清楚。
检索了两个数据库(PubMed、谷歌学术),以查找2009年至2020年间关于电子烟政策评估的英文同行评审文章。感兴趣的主要文章是评估电子烟政策的期刊文章。感兴趣的次要文章是那些确定了任何没有正式评估部分的电子烟政策行动、评估烟草政策的文章,或者描述电子烟行为和趋势的文章。第三类文章包括为电子烟趋势和额外政策识别提供背景的灰色文献。
最终样本包括12篇有电子烟政策评估部分的相关文章、62篇没有此类部分的相关文章以及19个灰色文献来源。研究结果根据政策类型进行了综合:产品分类、年龄限制、无烟政策、口味禁令、销售限制、税收、包装和广告。
在联邦、州和地方层面,针对电子烟获取和使用的政策很常见,大多是应对性的,并且模仿了烟草控制措施。很少有政策针对其在减少或预防青少年吸电子烟方面的有效性进行过正式评估。鉴于这些政策有可能干预影响青少年开始和采用电子烟的社会和环境条件,加强证据基础应是研究人员未来的首要任务。