Household vaping bans and youth e-cigarette use.

AIMS: The aims of this study were to measure whether household bans on vaping were associated with lower odds of youth past-month vaping when compared with (1) otherwise similar youth whose households did not have a vaping ban (using coarsened exact matching); and (2) themselves in waves when their household did not have a ban (using hybrid panel models). We used the same analytical strategies to examine cross-sectional associations between household smoking bans and adolescents' past-month cigarette smoking. DESIGN: This was a longitudinal study using data from a nationally representative sample of youth (age 12-17 years) in the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. SETTING: United States of America. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 16 214 adolescents followed over 48 103 total observations (approximately three waves). MEASUREMENTS: Measurements comprised youth past-month e-cigarette and cigarette use and parent-reported household bans on vaping and smoking. Potential confounders were prior adolescent smoking, vaping, and other nicotine product use; parent current smoking, vaping, and other nicotine use; adolescent peer e-cigarette/cigarette use; parental monitoring; and demographic characteristics. FINDINGS: Before matching, smoking bans were associated with 46% lower odds of youth smoking [odds ratio (OR) = 0.54; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.41-0.70] and vaping bans with 37% lower odds of youth e-cigarette use (OR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.50-0.80). However, households with and without bans differed significantly on all confounders before matching. After matching, household vaping bans were associated with 56% lower odds of youth vaping (OR = 0.44; 95% CI = 0.33-0.58). Results from hybrid panel models also revealed 37% lower odds of vaping in waves when youth lived in a vape-free household compared to waves when they did not (OR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.50-0.78). Associations between smoking bans and youth smoking were not statistically significant after matching or when using hybrid panel models. CONCLUSIONS: Household vaping bans appear to be associated with lower odds of past-month vaping among US adolescents, compared with similar youth whose households did not have a ban and to themselves in waves when their households did not have a ban.

Risk Factors for E-Cigarette Ban Relaxation in Homes With Adolescents.

PURPOSE: To identify risk factors for relaxing a strict e-cigarette ban in households with adolescents. METHODS: Youth (ages 12-17) in the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study whose parents held a strict vaping ban in 2016 (n = 6,514; 51.5% male) and their parents provided follow-up data on up to four occasions through 2020 on whether the ban was relaxed. RESULTS: 13.5% of households with strict vaping bans relaxed them in a subsequent wave. Results from a logistic regression model showed that the odds of relaxing strict bans were higher if, at baseline, parents vaped (OR = 2.20; 95% CI: 1.22-3.97; p < .01), parents smoked tobacco (OR = 2.55; CI: 2.00-3.26; p < .001), youth smoked tobacco (OR = 2.27; CI: 1.29-4.00; p < .01), parents reported no smoking ban (OR = 2.68; CI: 1.88-3.81; p < .001), youth did not know that their household had a vaping ban (OR = 1.95; CI: 1.50-2.54; p < .001), and parents perceived low harm from vaping (OR = 1.60; CI: 1.16-2.19; p < .01). Although most sociodemographic controls were not independently associated, parents were less likely to relax bans if they had a college degree (OR = 0.71; CI: 0.51-0.998; p < .05), graduate degree (OR = 0.50; CI: 0.43-0.72; p < .001), or children who were non-Hispanic Black (OR = 0.69; CI: 0.49-0.96; p < .05) or Hispanic (OR = 0.62; CI: 0.47-0.81; p < .001). DISCUSSION: While most households with adolescents prohibited e-cigarette use indoors, nearly one in seven relaxed prior strict vaping bans. Parents need support to maintain clear, consistent, and continuous restrictions that communicate that vaping is not safe or permissible for youth.