Impact of flavoured tobacco restriction policies on flavoured product availability in Massachusetts

Abstract

ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of flavoured tobacco product restriction policies in reducing availability of flavoured products in Massachusetts communities.MethodsData were obtained from surveys of tobacco retailers conducted from July 2015 to March 2017. On a community level, flavoured product availability was defined as the per cent of retailers during a given 3-month quarter that sold flavoured cigars/cigarillos, electronic cigarettes and/or e-liquids. Communities that implemented the policy during the study period were grouped into wave 1 (n=18; 1481 retail surveys) and wave 2 (n=20; 483 retail surveys) by date of policy implementation; communities without a flavoured product restriction served as the control group (n=234; 4932 retail surveys). A difference-in-difference analysis was used to compare the change in flavoured product availability in wave 1 and wave 2 communities 3 months pre-policy and post-policy implementation to the change over the same time periods in the control group.ResultsFrom pre-policy to post-policy implementation period, communities in both waves experienced significant reductions in flavoured product availability (ranging from 27.2% to 50.9%), even after adjusting for community-level characteristics. In both waves 1 and 2, reductions in flavoured product availability were significantly greater compared with comparison communities during the same time frame, adjusting for community-level characteristics.ConclusionsCompliance with flavoured product restriction policies is high among tobacco retailers throughout Massachusetts, regardless of community demographic and retail characteristics. Reduced availability of flavoured tobacco in the retail environment has the potential to reduce youth exposure, access and use of these products.

The actual and anticipated effects of a menthol cigarette ban: a scoping review

“…Of the nine excluded studies, one study found that adolescents had a 37% lower odds of ever trying flavored tobacco products and a 28% lower odds of ever using tobacco products post ban [54], two studies found that sales of other tobacco products fell [55,56], and six considered compliance [57][58][59][60][61][62]. The studies of compliance indicated mixed levels of compliance, with flavor products still available in up to 50% of retailers that were not allowed to sell flavored tobacco and smaller stores often continuing to carry banned products with staff oblivious to the ban [58,[60][61][62]. However, compliance was found to increase over time following the ban [60] and was higher in areas where investments are made in the education of store owners and staff and when there was increased enforcement [59].…”

“…The studies of compliance indicated mixed levels of compliance, with flavor products still available in up to 50% of retailers that were not allowed to sell flavored tobacco and smaller stores often continuing to carry banned products with staff oblivious to the ban [ 58 , 60 – 62 ]. However, compliance was found to increase over time following the ban [ 60 ] and was higher in areas where investments are made in the education of store owners and staff and when there was increased enforcement [ 59 ].…”

Compliance with San Francisco’s flavoured tobacco sales prohibition

“…3 In Massachusetts jurisdictions that implemented partial flavour bans excluding menthol and adultonly establishments (bars, vape shops and tobacconists) between July 2015 and March 2017, the availability of banned products fell by 27% to 86%, depending on the city. [4][5][6] In New York City, which exempted menthol, after initial opposition (including an unsuccessful lawsuit), 7 sales of banned flavoured tobacco products declined by 87% following enforcement in November 2010, and averaging 95% compliance between November 2010 and February 2015. 7 8 (The New York law excluded e-cigarettes, which were not defined as tobacco products under New York City law and exempted eight existing tobacco bars (bars that generated at least 10% of their income from on-site tobacco sales and the rental of on-site humidors).)…”

Advancing Tobacco Control Through Point of Sale Policies, Providence, Rhode Island

“…Although we cannot attribute these findings solely to Providence’s POS policy, the city’s restriction on the sale of flavored tobacco products might have contributed to this decline. Evaluations of POS tobacco policies that restricted the sale of flavored tobacco products have been conducted in New York City (13,14), Minneapolis and Saint Paul, Minnesota (15), and Massachusetts (16). These policies take different approaches, but the evaluations show that the availability and sale of these products declined significantly after policy enforcement.…”