Alternative tobacco products are increasing in popularity. An important question is whether their use is associated with or even leads to conventional smoking, but large-scale (European) studies are scarce. In two cohorts of Dutch adolescents (Cohort I n = 6819, mean age = 13.8 SD = 1.1, 48.2% female; Cohort II n = 2758, mean age = 17.3 SD = 1.8, 61.3% female), we investigated use of electronic (e)-cigarettes with nicotine, e-cigarettes without nicotine and waterpipe. Generalized estimating equation modelling was conducted with ever conventional smoking as the dependent variable (0 = no, 1 = yes) and ever alternative tobacco use as the independent variable, correcting for clustering within schools, age, sex and education in both cohorts. In a subsample (n = 2100), the association between alternative tobacco use at baseline and conventional smoking 6 months later was tested, taking into account smoking propensity (based on personality, susceptibility to peer pressure and smoking intentions). Ever use prevalence was 13.7% for e-cigarettes with nicotine, 29.4% for e-cigarettes without nicotine and 22.1% for waterpipe in Cohort I and 12.3, 27.6 and 45.3% respectively in Cohort II. Ever smokers had tried alternative tobacco products more often than never smokers. Among never-smoking adolescents at baseline, alternative tobacco use predicted ever smoking 6 months later (e-cigarettes with nicotine OR 11.90 95% CI 3.36–42.11; e-cigarettes without nicotine OR 5.36 95% CI 2.73–10.52; waterpipe OR 5.36 95% CI 2.78–10.31). This association was strongest for adolescents with a low baseline risk of smoking. Experimenting with alternative tobacco products is common among Dutch youth. Alternative tobacco use predicts (future) smoking, especially among adolescents with a low smoking propensity.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s10654-017-0345-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

ObjectivesMany workers in high-risk occupations, such as soldiers, are exposed to stressors at work, increasing their risk of developing mental health conditions and substance abuse (MHC/SA). Disclosure can lead to both positive (eg, support) and negative (eg, discrimination) work outcomes, and therefore, both disclosure and non-disclosure can affect health, well-being and sustainable employment, making it a complex dilemma. The objective is to study barriers to and facilitators for disclosure in the military from multiple perspectives.DesignQualitative focus groups with soldiers with and without MHC/SA and military mental health professionals. Sessions were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Content analysis was done using a general inductive approach.SettingThe study took place within the Dutch military.ParticipantsIn total, 46 people participated in 8 homogeneous focus groups, including 3 perspectives: soldiers with MHC/SA (N=20), soldiers without MHC/SA (N=10) and military mental health professionals (N=16).ResultsFive barriers for disclosure were identified (fear of career consequences, fear of social rejection, lack of leadership support, lack of skills to talk about MHC/SA, masculine workplace culture) and three facilitators (anticipated positive consequences of disclosure, leadership support, work-related MHC/SA). Views of the stakeholder groups were highly congruent.ConclusionsAlmost all barriers (and facilitators) were related to fear for stigma and discrimination. This was acknowledged by all three perspectives, suggesting that stigma and discrimination are considerable barriers to sustainable employment and well-being. Supervisor knowledge, attitudes and behaviour were critical for disclosure, and supervisors thus have a key role in improving health, well-being and sustainable employment for soldiers with MHC/SA. Furthermore, adjustments could be made by the military on a policy level, to take away some of the fears that soldiers have when disclosing MHC/SA.

BackgroundAlthough increasing numbers of countries are implementing outdoor school ground smoking bans at secondary schools, less attention is paid to the post-implementation period even though sustainability of a policy is essential for long-term effectiveness. Therefore, this study assesses the level of sustainability and examines perceived barriers/facilitators related to the sustainability of an outdoor school ground smoking ban at secondary schools.MethodsA mixed-method design was used with a sequential explanatory approach. In phase I, 438 online surveys were conducted and in phase II, 15 semi-structured interviews were obtained from directors of relevant schools. ANOVA (phase I) and a thematic approach (phase II) were used to analyze data.ResultsLevel of sustainability of an outdoor school ground smoking ban was high at the 48% Dutch schools with an outdoor smoking ban. Furthermore, school size was significantly associated with sustainability. The perceived barriers/facilitators fell into three categories: (i) smoking ban implementation factors (side-effects, enforcement, communication, guidelines and collaboration), (ii) school factors (physical environment, school culture, education type and school policy) and (iii) community environment factors (legislation and social environment).ConclusionsInternationally, the spread of outdoor school ground smoking bans could be further promoted. Once implemented, the ban has become ‘normal’ practice and investments tend to endure. Moreover, involvement of all staff is important for sustainability as they function as role models, have an interrelationship with students, and share responsibility for enforcement. These findings are promising for the sustainability of future tobacco control initiatives to further protect against the morbidity/mortality associated with smoking.

The effectiveness of outdoor smoking bans on smoking behavior among adolescents remains inconclusive. This study evaluates the long-term impact of outdoor school ground smoking bans among adolescents at secondary schools on the use of conventional cigarettes, e-cigarettes (with/without nicotine) and water pipes. Outdoor smoking bans at 19 Dutch secondary schools were evaluated using a quasi-experimental design. Data on 7733 adolescents were obtained at baseline, and at 6 and 18-month follow-up. The impact of outdoor smoking bans on ‘ever use of conventional cigarettes’, ‘smoking onset’, ‘ever use of e-cigarette with nicotine’, ‘e-cigarette without nicotine’, and ‘water pipe’ was measured. Multilevel logistic regression analysis was used. At schools with a ban, implementation fidelity was checked. At schools where a ban was implemented, at 18-month follow-up more adolescents had started smoking compared to the control condition. No effect of implementation of the ban was found for smoking prevalence, e-cigarettes with/without nicotine, and water pipe use. Implementation fidelity was sufficient. No long-term effects were found of an outdoor smoking ban, except for smoking onset. The ban might cause a reversal effect when schools encounter difficulties with its enforcement or when adolescents still see others smoking. Additional research is required with a longer follow-up than 18 months.

BackgroundWhereas smoking bans inside secondary school buildings are relatively widespread, a smoking ban for the outdoor school grounds is less common. Therefore, this study investigates why many secondary schools fail to adopt an outdoor school ground smoking ban. The aim is to elucidate the perceived barriers and facilitators of stakeholders at schools without an outdoor school ground smoking ban.MethodsQualitative data were obtained from 60 respondents of 15 secondary schools. Semi-structured interviews were held with various key stakeholders and a thematic approach was used for analysis of the transcripts.ResultsThe perceived barriers and facilitators of the stakeholders fell into four categories: 1) socio-political characteristics (legislation and social norm), 2) school characteristics (policy, decision process, enforcement, resources, workforce conditions, communication and collaboration), 3) individual characteristics (support, knowledge, and target group), and 4) smoking ban characteristics (environmental factors, guideline recommendations, outcome expectations, and evidence).ConclusionsThese findings highlight the importance of legislation for outdoor smoking bans. Moreover, collaboration, communication and involving stakeholders during an early stage of the process should be stimulated, as this might increase adoption. These results can be applied in future studies on outdoor tobacco control policies; moreover, they may facilitate tobacco control initiatives leading to more smoke-free environments to further protect youth from the harmful effects of tobacco.