Search

Background: In November 2019, the Massachusetts legislature passed An Act Modernizing Tobacco Control and became the first state to restrict retail sales of all flavored (including menthol) cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and other tobacco products. Our study aims to provide the retailer experience of the new law from the perspectives of multiple stakeholders, including tobacco retailers themselves, public health officials, and Massachusetts residents., Methods: We conducted in-depth interviews with seven tobacco retailers and ten public health officials from March 2021 to April 2022. Monthly repeated cross-sectional surveys were administered through the online survey panel Prodege from April 2021 to August 2022 (adult sample: N = 765; adolescent sample: N = 900). Themes from interviews were identified by drawing on deductive codes informed by the interview guide, followed by inductive coding of data. Survey data were descriptively analyzed in R., Results: Key themes included retailer frustration over loss of sales to neighboring states, factors associated with retailer compliance, and the need for increased education regarding the law. Survey results showed that a minority of adolescents (13.3%) and adults (26.1%) who vaped in the past 30-days were traveling to border states to purchase vape products. Less than one-quarter of adolescent participants and less than half of adult participants could correctly identify which products Massachusetts did not sell., Conclusions: Evidence from the retailer, public health, and end-user perspectives support mutual benefits of adjacent states enacting flavored tobacco sales restrictions, improved policy education for retailers and the public, and improved retailer enforcement., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: In November 2019, the Massachusetts legislature passed An Act Modernizing Tobacco Control and became the first state to restrict retail sales of all flavored (including menthol) cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and other tobacco products (the Act). Additional tobacco control policies and health insurance coverage for tobacco treatment were included as part of the Act. Implementation of these policies occurred between November 2019 and June 2020. This study explored challenges and facilitators during the implementation of the Act experienced by public health officials, school personnel, and healthcare providers., Methods: We conducted in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of 9 public health officials and advocates, 9 school personnel, and 8 healthcare providers from March to December 2021. We conducted thematic analysis of interview transcripts using inductive codes of key themes emerging from the interviews., Results: Interviewees highlighted three key themes that impacted the implementation of the Act: 1) Education of those impacted by the Act, 2) Organizational-level changes to incorporate the Act, and 3) Enforcement challenges. Examples of challenges to the implementation of the Act included COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, navigating tobacco industry tactics around naming flavors, and confusion regarding health insurance coverage for tobacco use cessation programs. Examples of facilitators were enforcement leading to retailer compliance, committed advocacy efforts of leadership/champions, and strong coordination within and between organizations., Conclusions: These findings of Massachusetts's experience in policy implementation can inform the preparation to implement similar tobacco control policies in other states., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest JW has served as an expert witness in litigation against the tobacco industry. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The Massachusetts legislature passed An Act Modernizing Tobacco Control in November 2019 to restrict retail sales of flavored commercially manufactured tobacco products including menthol products, increase penalties for violating the law's provisions, and provide health insurance coverage for tobacco treatment., Aims and Methods: This study explores key informants' perceptions of intended and unintended impacts of implementation of the 2019 Massachusetts statewide law through a health equity and racial justice lens. We conducted in-depth interviews with 25 key informants from three key informant groups (public health officials and advocates, clinicians, and school staff) between March 2021 and April 2022. Using deductive codes on unintended impacts of the implementation of the law's policies, we conducted a focused analysis to identify impacts that were perceived and observed by informants from different key informant groups., Results: Perceived or observed impacts of the law were identified across multiple levels by key informants and included concerns related to three broad themes: 1) intended impacts on health equity and racial justice, 2) ongoing availability of restricted products undermining the intended impact of the law, and 3) inequitable targeting by the policies and enforcement among communities of color., Conclusions: Future evaluation is needed to assess the intended and unintended impacts of implementation of the Massachusetts law to maximize the potential of the policies to reduce tobacco-related health disparities. We discuss implications and recommendations for achieving a national policy and equitable enforcement of flavored tobacco sales restrictions., Implications: This qualitative study among 25 key informants including public health and tobacco control advocates, clinicians, and school staff obtained perspectives of intended and unintended health equity and racial justice impacts of the 2019 Massachusetts An Act Modernizing Tobacco Control. Findings and recommendations from this study can inform monitoring efforts to assess the law's impacts in Massachusetts and the adoption of similar flavored tobacco sales restrictions and other tobacco control policies in other states to maximize the health equity benefits and minimize unintended impacts., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.)

We assessed vaping behaviors, environments, COVID-19 influences, and barriers and facilitators of existing approaches that address adolescent vaping in Massachusetts middle and high schools. Findings from this study will provide considerations for individual schools or districts as they advance adolescent vaping prevention and treatment efforts. We analyzed 310 open-ended comments from Massachusetts school administrators who completed a survey between November 2020 and January 2021. Further, we analyzed nine semi-structured interviews with administrators (e.g., principals, vice principals, school nurses) from Massachusetts school systems (n = 6) and school-based anti-tobacco advocates (n = 3); interviews took place between May and December 2021. Informed by Green's PRECEDE model, we conducted a framework analysis using deductive codes based on the model constructs (enabling, reinforcing, and predisposing factors) and inductive codes of key themes emerging from the interviews. Challenges to addressing adolescent vaping included staff capacity, funding, and lack of mental health and counseling supports. The COVID-19 pandemic was a major barrier to conducting usual in-person vaping programs, but also reduced student vaping at school due to new social distancing practices and bathroom use policies. Facilitators of vaping interventions included peer-led initiatives and parental involvement. Participants discussed the importance of educating adolescents on the harms of vaping and the move toward alternatives-to-suspension programs rather than disciplinary action. School-based anti-vaping program implementers-such as school districts, state departments of education, or local health departments-will need to leverage facilitators such as peer-led initiatives, alternatives-to-suspension approaches, and parental involvement, to increase the potential impact of these programs., (© Society of Behavioral Medicine 2023. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Smoke-free policies (SFP) in multi-unit housing are a promising tool for reducing exposure to tobacco smoke among residents. Concerns about increased housing instability due to voluntary or involuntary transitions induced by SFPs have been a primary barrier to greater widespread adoption. The impact of SFP implementation on transitions out of public housing in federally funded public housing authorities in Massachusetts was evaluated., Methods: Tenancy data from the Department of Housing and Urban Development were used to determine the time from admission to transitioning out of public housing based on a cohort study design. Periods of exposure to SFPs were defined based on dates of SFP implementation at each PHA. Multi-level Cox regression models were fit to estimate the effects of SFPs on the hazard of transitioning, adjusting for household- and PHA-level characteristics. Analyses were conducted in 2021‒2022., Results: There were 44,705 households with a record of residence in Massachusetts PHAs over 2009‒2018. Over this period, despite increasing adoption of SFPs among the PHAs, rates of transition remained steady at around 5‒8 transitions per 1,000 household-months. There was no overall association between exposure to SFPs and transitions among the full sample (adjusted HR=0.99, 95% CI=0.95, 1.04, p=0.794). However, the association varied significantly by age group, race/ethnicity, timing of SFP adoption, and era of admission., Conclusions: Adoption of SFPs in public housing had a minimal overall impact on turnover for households in Massachusetts, though disparities in the impact were observed between different demographic and PHA-level subgroups., (Copyright © 2022 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

A 2018 rule requiring federally-subsidized public housing authorities (PHAs) in the United States to adopt smoke-free policies (SFPs) has sparked interest in how housing agencies can best implement SFPs. However, to date, there is little quantitative data on the implementation of SFPs in public housing. Massachusetts PHAs were among the pioneers of SFPs in public housing, and many had instituted SFPs voluntarily prior to the federal rule. The aim of this study was to examine the adoption, implementation, and outcomes of SFPs instituted in Massachusetts PHAs prior to 2018 using a survey conducted that year. The survey asked if PHAs had SFPs and, if so, what activities were used to implement them: providing information sessions, offering treatment or referral for smoking cessation, soliciting resident input, training staff, partnering with outside groups, using a toolkit, and/or providing outdoor smoking areas. We used multivariable regression to investigate associations between implementation activities and respondent-reported policy outcomes (resident support, complaints about neighbors' smoking, and the number of violations reported per year). Of 238 Massachusetts PHAs, 218 (91%) completed the survey and 161 had an SFP prior to 2018. Common implementation activities were offering smoking cessation treatment/referral (89%) and information sessions for residents (85%). Information sessions for residents were associated with higher resident support (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 4.3; 95%CI 1.2-15.3). Training staff (AOR 6.3, 95%CI 1.2-31.8) and engaging in ≥5 implementation activities (AOR 4.1, 95%CI 1.2-14.1) were associated with fewer smoking-related complaints. Utilization of multiple implementation activities, especially ones that informed residents and trained PHA staff, was associated with more favorable policy outcomes. We identified five groups of PHAs that shared distinct patterns of SFP implementation activities. Our findings, documenting implementation activities and their associations with SFP outcomes among the early adopters of SPFs in Massachusetts public housing, can help inform best practices for the future implementation of SFPs in multiunit housing.

Secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS) exposure increases nonsmokers' risk of coronary heart disease and worsens outcomes after hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome, but it is rarely addressed in inpatient cardiac care. We developed and assessed a hospital-based intervention to increase nonsmokers' awareness of SHS as a cardiovascular risk factor. Nonsmokers admitted to 2 cardiac units of a large Boston, Massachusetts, hospital were surveyed before (May 2010 to January 2011) and after (November 2011 to March 2012) a system-level nurse-delivered intervention was implemented in October 2011. It consisted of a revised admission form that prompted nurses to document SHS exposure at admission, provide a pamphlet about SHS risks, and advise nonsmokers to make their home and car smoke free. The primary outcome was patients' short-term recall of advice to keep their home and car smoke free. The secondary outcome was patients' awareness of the cardiovascular risk of SHS exposure. We enrolled 190 nonsmokers before and 142 nonsmokers after implementation. Adjusting for group differences, patients admitted after the system change were more likely to recall being asked if a household member smokes (24% vs 10%, adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 3.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8 to 7.1, p=0.0002) and being advised to keep their home and car smoke free (28% vs 2%, AOR 27.3, 95% CI 7.8 to 95.7, p<0.0001). After the intervention, more patients believed that SHS exposure increased cardiovascular risk for nonsmokers (42% vs 21%, AOR 2.6, 95% CI 1.6 to 4.4) and for themselves (39% vs 22%, AOR 2.2, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.8). In conclusion, a system-level intervention in cardiac units successfully increased hospitalized nonsmokers' awareness of the cardiovascular risk of SHS exposure., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

National trends indicate that children and adolescents are not achieving sufficient levels of physical activity. Combining global positioning system (GPS) technology with accelerometers has the potential to provide an objective determination in locations where youth engage in physical activity. The aim of this study was to identify the optimal methods for collecting combined accelerometer and GPS data in youth, to best locate where children spend time and are physically active. A convenience sample of 24 mid-school children in Massachusetts was included. Accelerometers and GPS units were used to quantify and locate childhood physical activity over 5 weekdays and 2 weekend days. Accelerometer and GPS data were joined by time and mapped with a geographical information system (GIS) using ArcGIS software. Data were collected in winter, spring, summer in 2009-2010, collecting a total of 26,406 matched datapoints overall. Matched data yield was low (19.1% total), regardless of season (winter, 12.8%; spring, 30.1%; summer, 14.3%). Teacher-provided, pre-charged equipment yielded the most matched (30.1%; range: 10.1-52.3%) and greatest average days (6.1 days) of data. Across all seasons, children spent most of their time at home. Outdoor use patterns appeared to vary by season, with street use increasing in spring, and park and playground use increasing in summer. Children spent equal amounts of physical activity time at home and walking in the streets. Overall, the various methods for combining GPS and accelerometer data provided similarly low amounts of combined data. No combined GPS and accelerometer data collection method proved superior in every data return category, but use of GIS to map joined accelerometer and GPS data can demarcate childhood physical activity locations.

Background: Active commuting to school provides regular exercise, which can improve asthma symptoms. Little is known about how children with asthma travel to school., Objective: To identify travel patterns and parental perceptions surrounding mode of travel to school among children with asthma., Methods: Cross-sectional study of 176 children with asthma aged 5 to 15 years. Parents completed questionnaires assessing mode of travel to school, physical activity, asthma control, physician counseling, and factors influencing parental decisions. Data analysis included descriptive and bivariate statistics., Results: Few (16%) children with asthma actively commute to school. Active travelers lived closer to school, and "distance" was the most frequently reported factor influencing a parent's decision regarding travel mode to school. Parents reported few concerns about pollution and little physician counseling on active travel., Conclusion: Few children with asthma actively travel to school. Asthma-specific concerns do not appear to guide parental decisions on travel mode to school.

Objective: Parental smoking is associated with increased rates and severity of childhood respiratory illness. No previous studies have examined child hospitalization as an opportunity for parental smoking cessation. We evaluated the feasibility of implementing a smoking cessation intervention for parents at the time of child hospitalization for respiratory illness., Methods: We performed a prospective cohort study of smoking parents who had a child who was admitted to an academic children's hospital for a respiratory illness between January and April 2000. All enrollees were offered the Stop Tobacco Outreach Program, which includes an initial motivational interview, written materials, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), telephone counseling, and fax referral to parents' primary clinician. The primary outcome was completion of all 3 counseling sessions. Two-month follow-up outcomes were quit attempts, cessation, NRT use, primary care visits, household smoking prohibition, and satisfaction., Results: A total of 126 smoking parents met eligibility criteria, and 71 (56%) enrolled in the study. Of the 71, 80% completed all counseling sessions and 56% accepted free NRT at the time of enrollment. At the 2-month follow-up, of the 71 initial enrollees, 49% reported having made a quit attempt that lasted at least 24 hours, 21% reported not smoking a cigarette in the last 7 days, 27% reported having used NRT, and 38% had had a visit with their own primary clinician. The proportion of parents who reported rules prohibiting smoking in the house increased (29% vs 71%). Parental rating of the overall usefulness of the program was 4.3 +/- 0.9 (1 standard deviation) on the 5-point scale 1 = not at all and 5 = a great extent., Conclusions: This study demonstrates the feasibility of engaging parents in smoking cessation interventions at the time of child hospitalization for respiratory illness. Previous work done in a similar sample of parental smokers has shown extremely low ever-use rates of cessation programs. High rates of acceptance of in-hospital and telephone counseling in this study support the notion of child hospitalization as a teachable moment to address parental smoking.