Search

Aims Sweeping policy changes during the COVID-19 pandemic increased alcohol availability through permitted to-go sales, potentially posing unique risks to college students. While to-go sales may make binge drinking more convenient, little remains known about these practices. Therefore, this study aimed to assess whether drinking establishments' to-go sales practices are associated with their other operational practices and state policy. Method This cross-sectional analysis included 221 randomly selected bars, nightclubs, and restaurants within two miles of a large public university. Telephone interviews assessed establishment practices, and the Alcohol Policy Information System provided state alcohol to-go laws. Regression models tested whether establishment to-go sales practices were associated with their business practices (logistic regression) and state policy (generalized estimating equations). Results Nearly one-half (44.8%) of drinking establishments sold alcohol to-go. Establishments with higher vodka prices had nearly 30% higher odds of selling spirits to-go (aOR  = 1.29) and establishments offering happy hours specials had more than twice the odds of selling beer (aOR  = 2.22), wine (aOR  = 2.53), and spirits to-go (aOR  = 2.60). Additionally, establishments that implemented physical distance requirements had higher odds of selling wine to-go (aOR  = 3.00). State to-go laws were associated with higher odds of selling wine (aOR  = 3.99) and spirits to-go (aOR  = 5.43) in the full sample and beer to-go (aOR  = 4.92) in urban counties. Conclusions Establishments that sell alcohol to-go tend to engage in other practices designed to drive sales. Evaluations of alcohol to-go sales laws on risky consumption among priority populations, including college students, are urgently needed to inform decisions about how to appropriately regulate sales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examine the proportion of students with rapid firearm access and associations with recent alcohol and marijuana use. Cross-sectional data from college freshmen (n = 183) in 2020 who participated in the Mason: Health Starts Here study. Using logistic regression, associations were examined between past 30-day substance use and access to firearms within 15-min. More than 10% of students could rapidly access a firearm, 53% of whom were current binge drinkers, compared to 13% of those who could not rapidly access firearms. Non-Hispanic White students (AOR = 4.1, 95%CI = 1.3,12.7) and past 30-day binge drinkers (AOR = 6.4, 95%CI = 2.1,19.7) had greater odds of having rapid firearm access. Age, sex, and past 30-day marijuana use were not associated with rapid access. A notable proportion of students had rapid firearm access, which was strongly associated with recent binge drinking. Campus prevention programs should consider how their alcohol and firearm policies could be enhanced to prevent violence/self-harm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Alcohol delivery and to-go sales may contribute to changes in drinking patterns, including where and what people drink. This study tested whether home delivery and to-go alcohol purchases were associated with context- and beverage-specific consumption volumes during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic after adjusting for pre-pandemic consumption volumes. Method: Data from a pre-pandemic panel were compared to a during-pandemic panel of the National Alcohol Survey (n = 1,150 adult drinkers, 52.7% female). Outcomes were past-year alcohol consumption volumes in standard drinks (overall, by beverage type, and by location). Independent variables included past-year alcohol delivery and to-go purchases (separately). Covariates comprised baseline beverage- or context-specific volume, demographics, COVID-19 impacts, and drinking motivations. Negative binomial regression tested associations between alcohol purchases and change in overall, beverage-, and context-specific consumption. Results: On average, respondents who had alcohol delivered (vs. not) reported consuming larger volumes overall (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.58, 95% CI [1.07, 2.32], p = .02), of wine (IRR = 2.90, 95% CI [1.50, 5.63], p < .04), of spirits (IRR = 1.59, 95% CI [1.03, 2.44], p = .04), and at home (IRR = 1.59, 95% CI [1.10, 2.31], p = .01). People who bought alcohol to go (vs. not) reported larger volumes of wine (IRR = 1.41, 95% CI [1.02, 1.96], p = .04), at home (IRR = 1.60, 95% CI [1.10, 2.32], p = .01), and in bars (IRR = 4.55, 95% CI [2.55, 8.11], p < .001). Finally, people who had alcohol delivered reported drinking smaller volumes in bars (IRR = 0.49, 95% CI [0.24, 0.98], p = .04). Conclusions: During the first year of the pandemic, adults who had alcohol delivered or bought it to go reported larger volumes for several locations and beverage types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Almost 10 years after the World Health Assembly adopted the Global strategy to reduce harmful use of alcohol, and seven years after the inclusion of alcohol as one of the [...]

Aim Kingdon [(2014) Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Essex. United Kingdom: Pearson Education Limited] argues that windows of opportunity to pass policies emerge when problems, solutions and policy support co-occur. This study aims to identify a set of alcohol policies with the potential to reduce alcohol-related disparities given high levels of support from marginalized groups, such as racial/ethnic minorities and lower-income groups. Methods This study used data from five US National Alcohol Surveys, which were based on household probability samples of adults in 1995 (n  = 4243), 2000 (n  = 5736), 2005 (n  = 1445), 2010 (n  = 4164) and 2015 (n  = 4041). We used multiple logistic regression to determine the odds of policy support by racial/ethnic group and income level, considering price, place and marketing policies as well as individual-level interventions. Results Overall a majority of Americans supported banning alcohol sales in corner stores (59.4%), banning alcohol advertisements on television (55.5%), and establishing universal health coverage for alcohol treatment (80.0%). Support was particularly high among Blacks, Hispanics/Latinos and lower-income persons. Multivariate models showed that compared with White people, foreign-born Hispanics/Latinos had the most robust levels of support, including raising alcohol taxes (aOR  = 2.40, 95% CI: 2.00, 2.88, P  < 0.0001), banning alcohol sales in corner stores (aOR  = 2.85, 95% CI: 2.22, 3.65, P  < 0.0001) and reducing retail sales hours (aOR  = 2.91, 95% CI: 2.38, 3.55, P  < 0.0001). Conclusion Of the policies examined, banning alcohol sales at corner stores is most likely to be in a "window of opportunity" for reducing alcohol-related disparities. By simultaneously reducing population-level consumption and harms from others' drinking, place-based policies have the potential to reduce harms experienced by marginalized groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]