Leveraging National Data and Regional Innovations to Right-Size Tobacco Treatment Policy for Behavioral Health in a Midwestern State.

BACKGROUND: People with mental health (MH) and substance use disorders (SUD) have high rates of tobacco use and tobacco-related mortality. They want to stop smoking and studies have shown they can quit, but few behavioral health facilities provide tobacco treatment. The purpose of this paper is to describe how a midwestern statewide behavioral health collaboration used regional data to pinpoint strengths and weaknesses in tobacco treatment trends, identified policies in neighboring states that were associated with high rates of tobacco treatment, and worked with state leaders to implement these policies to enhance treatment. METHODS: We used publicly available data from 2 SAMHSA annual national surveys of MH/SUD facilities to describe tobacco treatment services and policies in behavioral health facilities in Kansas and 3 neighboring states (Missouri, Nebraska and Oklahoma). We interviewed neighboring state leaders to identify policies they had implemented to boost tobacco recovery services in behavioral health. We collaborated with our state behavioral health agency to encourage adoption of similar policies. RESULTS: Using 7 years of survey data (2014-2020), rates for screening, counseling, and medications for tobacco dependence were highest in Oklahoma and Missouri facilities. Oklahoma had the highest percentages of facilities reporting smoke-free campuses. In all states, rates of tobacco service provision and smoke-free campuses were lower among SUD facilities than in MH facilities. State leaders associated several policies with high performance, including (a) requiring programs contracting with the state to conduct screening, provide counseling, and adopt smoke-free campuses (Oklahoma and Missouri); (b) state-based collection of tobacco treatment service provision data (Oklahoma); (c) providing facilities with free NRT for clients (Oklahoma); (d) setting benchmarks for service provision (Oklahoma); (e) comprehensive Medicaid coverage of cessation medications (Missouri). Upon review of these findings, Kansas behavioral health officials adopted a 2-year process to implement similar policies and are integrating tobacco treatment requirements into the state Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinic program. CONCLUSIONS: Summarizing and sharing freely-available data across states laid the groundwork for cross-border networking and policy change. State and federal agencies should integrate these policies into contracts and block grants to reduce tobacco-related disparities among individuals with behavioral health conditions.

Preemption in State Tobacco Minimum Legal Sales Age Laws in the US, 2022: A Policy Analysis of State Statutes and Case Laws.

Preemptive statutory language within tobacco minimum legal sales age (MLSA) laws has prohibited localities from enacting stricter laws than state statutes. With the recent uptake of state Tobacco 21 laws in the US, the current landscape of preempted MLSA laws is unknown. This study sought to update the status of preemption in MLSA laws enacted in US states between 2015-2022. A public health attorney reviewed state tobacco MLSA laws (n = 50) and state tobacco control codes, searching for language regarding preemption. When statutes were unclear, case law was reviewed by examining local ordinances that were invalidated by state court decisions. Overall, 40 states enacted Tobacco 21 laws, seven of which expanded or introduced preemption when they increased the MLSA; a total of 26 states (52%) included preemption. Six states (12%) retained 'savings clauses' included in the MLSA prior to Tobacco 21, and 18 states (36%) did not mention preemption. Based on the precedent set by state courts, eight of these 18 states may preempt localities from raising their MLSA. Historically, preemption has slowed the diffusion of best practices in tobacco control, and once implemented, the laws are difficult to repeal. The recent expansion of preemption could inhibit the evolution, development, and implementation of effective tobacco control policies.

Components in tobacco-free school policies-A coding tool for assessment.

OBJECTIVE: To develop an instrument to examine tobacco-free campus policy components. PARTICIPANTS: Missouri two- and four-year, specialized/technical, and religious colleges and universities (N = 76). Methods: The instrument was informed via literature review and expert interviews. Coder agreement was strong (κ = .80). Qualitative policy language examples were identified. RESULTS: Model policy components including consideration for population, prohibited products, location restrictions, enforcement, consequences, promotions, communications, cessation, designated smoking areas and exemptions; comprehensive policies included all populations, for all tobacco products, and at all locations on the campus. Nineteen campuses had comprehensive tobacco-free policies, five had comprehensive smoke-free policies (cigarettes and e-cigarettes), and no policy included all model components. Fifty-two were non-comprehensive. CONCLUSIONS: This instrument can allow campuses to identify components for comprehensive and model tobacco-free campus policies and assist officials in improving policy language. Future research can use this instrument to examine the effectiveness of components and their impact on tobacco use outcomes.

Tobacco 21 Policies in the U.S.: The Importance of Local Control With Federal Policy.

INTRODUCTION: In December 2019, the U.S. raised the minimum legal sales age of tobacco to 21 years, a law commonly known as Tobacco 21. This study examines local Tobacco 21 policies for the inclusion of model policy components: comprehensive tobacco definition, age verification and tobacco access, enforcement measures, tobacco retail license, and violation penalties. METHODS: A document analysis of Tobacco 21 local policies passed in the U.S. before July 1, 2019 (N=477) was conducted in May 2020 using a Tobacco 21 policy assessment tool. Policies were coded by 2 independent coders for the inclusion of components. RESULTS: Many localities included model component: comprehensive tobacco definition (65%), appearance age (70.9%), local tobacco retail license (72%), a graduated monetary penalty structure (93%), and tobacco retail license suspensions or revocations (74%) for repeated violations. However, only 17.4% of policies included an appearance age in compliance with federal law (30 years). Furthermore, few policies included enforcement components, such as a mandatory number of inspections (5.9%) or compliance checks (6.7%) per year, or a minimum age for the underage purchasers used during compliance checks (8.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Local policies can play an important role in tobacco control by providing an added layer to ensure adequate enforcement of age-restriction policies and allow an avenue to introduce strict measures that may diffuse into higher branches of government for policy adoption. Although many local Tobacco 21 policies fill regulatory gaps within the state and federal laws, often there is a lack of model components to ensure that policies are implemented as intended.

Development of a tobacco 21 policy assessment tool and state-level analysis in the USA, 2015-2019.

OBJECTIVE: Policies raising the minimum legal sales age (MLSA) of tobacco products to 21 are commonly referred to as tobacco 21. This study sought to identify components of tobacco 21 policies and develop an instrument to examine policy language within 16 state laws adopted by July 2019. METHODS: The multistage tool development process began with a review of established literature and existing tobacco 21 policies. In a series of meetings, tobacco control experts identified key policy components used to develop an initial tool. After testing and revisions, the instrument was used to code the existing tobacco 21 state-level policies. Inter-rater reliability (κ=0.70) was measured and discrepancies were discussed until consensus was met. Policy component frequencies were reported by state. RESULTS: While all 16 states raised the MLSA to 21, the laws varied widely. Two laws omitted purchaser identification requirements. Fifteen laws mentioned enforcement would include inspections, but only three provided justification for conducting inspections. All 16 states provided a penalty structure for retailer/clerk violations, but penalties ranged considerably. Fourteen states required a tobacco retail licence, nine renewed annually. Six laws contained a military exemption, five were phased-in and 10 contained purchase, use or possession laws, which penalised youth. Four states introduced or expanded pre-emption of local tobacco control. CONCLUSIONS: The instrument developed is the first to examine policy components within state-level tobacco 21 laws. Policies that include negative components or omit positive components may not effectively prevent retailers from selling to youth, which could result in less effective laws.

Tobacco Control Policy Adoption Dynamics: A Case Study of Missouri Communities.

Tobacco control policies reduce the health and economic burden caused by tobacco. With over half of the United States communities lacking adequate protective policies, an examination of policy adoption factors can provide insights to facilitate policy adoption. A case study approach examines the rate of adoption, prominent media frames, policy leaders' perceptions and coalition activities for smokefree and Tobacco 21 policies adopted in Missouri. Findings show compared to smokefree policy, Tobacco 21 requires a considerably shorter timeframe and fewer resources for adoption. Tobacco 21 coalitions target a small group of stakeholders compared to smokefree coalitions' emphasis on broad community engagement. Both policies are formally opposed, but elected officials perceive less political risk supporting Tobacco 21. As a new tobacco control policy tool, Tobacco 21 has relative advantage that should be considered by community health advocates.