Ware Orrin D, Geiger G Rose, Bautista Tara G, Baca-Atlas Michael H
School of Social Work, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Department of Psychological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, USA.
Tob Use Insights. 2025 May 12;18:1179173X251342694. doi: 10.1177/1179173X251342694. eCollection 2025.
Unlike combustible cigarettes, vaping does not produce smoke, creating ambiguity around indoor vaping policies. Vaping policies in substance use disorder treatment facilities may directly impact how an individual engages with treatment.
To examine associated factors with vaping policies within substance use disorder treatment facilities in the United States.
This cross-sectional study used data from the National Substance Use and Mental Health Services Survey to examine data from substance use disorder treatment facilities. Other data included the state percentage of adults who use e-cigarettes from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, and state-level indoor e-cigarette restriction policies from the State Tobacco Activity Tracking and Evaluations System.
A total of N = 16 042 substance use disorder treatment facilities in 2022 were included. Factors that were examined include [a] state percentages of adults who vape, [b] state indoor vaping restrictions, [c] tobacco use screening in facilities, [d] smoking/tobacco education and counseling in facilities, [e] availability of nicotine pharmacotherapies in facilities, [f] facility smoking policies, [g] availability of outpatient or non-hospital residential treatment, and [h] availability of a treatment program specifically for adolescents or young adults. Facility vaping policies is the outcome variable in this study with three values: [a] vaping is restricted, [b] vaping in designated outdoor area(s), and [c] permissive vaping policies (anywhere outside, designated indoor areas, anywhere inside, anywhere without restriction).
Vaping policies across all treatment facilities include 45.9% restricted vaping, 45.9% permitted vaping in designated outdoor area(s), and 8.2% had a permissive vaping policy. State-level percentage of adults who use e-cigarettes, state indoor e-cigarette restrictions, facility smoking policies, and services provided by facilities were associated with different vaping policies, ranging from restrictive to permissive policies.
Various vaping policies exist in substance use disorder treatment facilities. Different vaping policies may have varied impacts on individuals' treatment goals.
与可燃香烟不同,电子烟不会产生烟雾,这使得室内电子烟政策存在模糊性。物质使用障碍治疗机构的电子烟政策可能会直接影响个体参与治疗的方式。
研究美国物质使用障碍治疗机构中与电子烟政策相关的因素。
这项横断面研究使用了来自国家物质使用和心理健康服务调查的数据,以检查物质使用障碍治疗机构的数据。其他数据包括行为风险因素监测系统中使用电子烟的成年人的州百分比,以及州烟草活动跟踪和评估系统中的州级室内电子烟限制政策。
纳入了2022年总共N = 16042家物质使用障碍治疗机构。研究的因素包括:[a] 使用电子烟的成年人的州百分比,[b] 州室内电子烟限制,[c] 机构内的烟草使用筛查,[d] 机构内的吸烟/烟草教育与咨询,[e] 机构内尼古丁药物疗法的可用性,[f] 机构吸烟政策,[g] 门诊或非医院住院治疗的可用性,以及[h] 专门针对青少年或年轻人的治疗项目的可用性。机构电子烟政策是本研究的结果变量,有三个值:[a] 电子烟受限,[b] 在指定的室外区域使用电子烟,以及[c] 宽松的电子烟政策(室外任何地方、指定的室内区域、室内任何地方、无限制的任何地方)。
所有治疗机构的电子烟政策包括45.9%的机构限制使用电子烟,45.9%的机构允许在指定的室外区域使用电子烟,8.2%的机构有宽松的电子烟政策。使用电子烟的成年人的州级百分比、州室内电子烟限制、机构吸烟政策以及机构提供的服务与不同的电子烟政策相关,范围从限制性政策到宽松政策。
物质使用障碍治疗机构存在各种电子烟政策。不同的电子烟政策可能对个体的治疗目标产生不同的影响。