Background School tobacco policies (STPs) that aim to achieve a tobacco-free environment require consistent enforcement by school staff. However, little is known about why staff choose whether or not to enforce STPs. Therefore, we investigated staff members’ responses to STPs that determine enforcement. Furthermore, we examined how these responses depend on contextual factors at the individual, interpersonal, school, implementation, and national levels. Methods We performed a realist review (RR), which synthesizes existing primary evidence into a programme theory demonstrating key causal pathways through Context-Mechanism-Outcome configurations (CMOs). These CMOs link contextual factors to outcomes (i.e. staff enforcement) by explaining the underlying generative mechanisms (i.e. staff members’ cognitive, psychosocial, and behavioural responses). A systematic literature search for the period 2000–2016 was performed using Academic Search Premier, PsycInfo, and MEDLINE. Forty English-language articles were identified for the synthesis. Results Our programme theory demonstrated three CMOs: when contextual factors make staff members experience STP enforcement as part of their professional role and duties, it may lead to staff members showing responsibility for STP enforcement (CMO1); when contextual factors make staff members feel their contribution is leading to positive outcomes, it may lead to staff members showing motivation to enforce STPs (CMO2), and when contextual factors make staff members feel that they are able to deal with students’ responses, it may lead to staff members showing confidence in STP enforcement (CMO3). Moreover, the programme theory provided more precise insights into what contextual factors contribute to triggering the individual mechanisms and the consequent outcomes. Conclusions By applying a realist approach, we have been able to detect three CMOs explaining staff members’ STP enforcement. The findings provide useful insights explaining how stakeholders can support staff members’ STP enforcement and consequently improve the impact of STPs on adolescent smoking. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13643-019-1086-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

No abstract

Summary Secondary schools in European countries increasingly implement comprehensive smoke-free school policies (SFSPs) that prohibit most or even all adolescents from smoking during school hours. Consistent enforcement of SFSPs is essential for realizing optimum effectiveness. A main challenge represents adolescents who persistently violate the rules. We studied how staff in European countries respond to these persistent violators and why they may turn a blind eye. We used interview transcripts from 69 staff members at 22 schools in 6 European countries to identify cases in which staff turned a blind eye. We then applied thematic analysis for identifying the considerations as to why they turn a blind eye. Turning a blind eye on persistent violators happened among school staff in all six countries. Three considerations were identified. First, staff believe their primary role and duty is to support all adolescents to develop into well-functioning adults, and sometimes it is best to accept smoking. Second, staff expect that applying stricter disciplinary measures will not stop persistent violators and is more likely to create more severe problems. Third, staff do not feel supported by relevant actors in society (e.g. parents) in influencing adolescent smoking. We conclude that staff’s considerations stress the need to support school staff in enforcing the increasingly comprehensive rules on the most persistent smokers.

Aims: Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan set a goal of creating a Tobacco-Free Generation in Europe by 2040. Prevention is important for achieving this goal. We compare the Nordic countries’ preventive tobacco policies, discuss the possible determinants for similarities and differences in policy implementation, and provide strategies for strengthening tobacco prevention. Methods: We used the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) to identify the key policies for this narrative review. We focused on Articles 6, 8, 9, 11, 13 and 16 of the WHO FCTC, and assessed the status of the required (core) and recommended (advanced) policies and their application to novel tobacco and nicotine products. Information on the implementation of strategies, acts and regulations were searched from global and national tobacco control databases, websites and scientific articles via PubMed and MEDLINE. Results: The WHO FCTC and European regulations have ensured that the core policies are mostly in place, but also contributed to the shared deficiencies that are seen especially in the regulations on smokeless tobacco and novel products. Strong national tobacco control actors have facilitated countries to implement some advanced policies – even as the first countries in the world: point-of-sale display bans (Iceland), outdoor smoking bans (Sweden), flavour bans on electronic cigarettes (Finland), plain packaging (Norway), and plain packaging on electronic cigarettes (Denmark). Conclusions: Collaboration and participation in reinforcing the European regulations, resources for national networking between tobacco control actors, and national regulations to provide protection from the tobacco industry’s interference are needed to strengthen comprehensive implementation of tobacco policies in the Nordic countries.