P1055 - Vaping in Schools: What do Teens Think?

Vaping in Schools: What do Teens Think?

Simran Jutla MD, Passang Tsekey, Aviva Beleck, Allison Eliscu MD, Rachel Boykan MD

Introduction: Electronic cigarette use is widespread in middle schools (MS) and high schools (HS) in the United States; 20% of adolescents have witnessed their peers vaping in school. Policies implemented by schools to reduce e-cigarette use include installation of vaping sensors or metal detectors, removal of bathroom doors, confiscation, suspension, and expulsion. However, the extent to which students consider these policies effective in decreasing the prevalence of e-cigarette use in schools is unclear. Investigators conducted a qualitative study in Suffolk County, NY on MS and HS students’ perceptions of school management of e-cigarette use.

Objectives: 1) Determine adolescents’ understanding of the health harms associated with e-cigarette use; 2) Describe adolescents’ attitudes and behaviors related to e-cigarette use; 3) Define adolescents’ attitudes related to the effectiveness of current school policies regarding e-cigarette use.

Methods: Investigators conducted focus groups of middle school (MS) and high school (HS) students in two Suffolk County school districts (District A: MS (n = 5) and HS (n = 2); District B: HS (n = 6, n = 5)). Demographic data was collected by anonymous questionnaire; narrative data was analyzed by three investigators using iterative coding and thematic analysis.

Results: In the two districts, 20% of MS and 50% of HS students had tried e-cigarettes, 0 MS and 17% of HS students had currently used within the past month, and 57% of MS and 100% of HS students had friends who currently used e-cigarettes. Although students reported learning about health harms associated with vaping in health class and assemblies, they felt school-based education was limited and looked to peers or the media for further education. Motivations to vape included enticing flavors, curiosity, stress, and feelings of euphoria. Students continued to vape due to easy availability and addiction. Current school interventions included strict bathroom policies, vaping sensors, bag checks, confiscation, peer mediation groups, and out of school suspensions. Students perceived these measures as ineffective in reducing vaping in school, as they reported observing peers vape in bathrooms, locker rooms, classrooms and hallways. Students offered alternative interventions, including improved classroom education, parent education, open-door discussion policies for addicted students struggling, community service opportunities, and in-school suspensions. Further analyses will compare the two districts for significant differences.

Discussion: Electronic cigarette use remains rampant in Suffolk County school districts, despite extensive mitigation policies. Opportunities exist for school administrators to better educate, support, and revise current policy to better meet the needs of MS and HS students. Further research should involve a larger student samples to confirm these findings and develop recommendations for policy change.