Table 1:
Administrator perceives e-cigarettes were an issuea,b (n = 809; N = 74,446) | Administrator perceives e-cigarettes were NOT an issuea (n = 1946; N = 235,966) | Total Students (n = 2755; N = 310,412) | |
---|---|---|---|
% (95% CI) | % (95% CI) | % (95% CI) | |
Ever e-cigarette use | |||
No policy | 31.1 (19.6–42.5) | 16.7 (8.7–29.8) | 18.3 (10.7–29.4) |
Policy exists | 16.5 (12.7–20.3) | 17.5 (11.2–26.3) | 17.2 (11.9–24.2) |
Past 30 day e-cigarette use | |||
No policy | 11.4 (3.2–19.7) | 6.9 (3.2–14.3) | 7.4 (3.9–13.5) |
Policy exists | 7.4 (5.0–9.7) | 7.1 (4.5–10.9) | 7.1 (4.9–10.3) |
Susceptibility to e-cigarette use | |||
No policy | 40.1 (25.3–54.9) | 32.8 (24.9–41.7) | 33.5 (26.3–41.5) |
Policy exists | 25.9 (20.2–31.6) | 31.1 (25.6–37.2) | 29.6 (24.4–35.5) |
Perceived peer use | |||
No policy | 61.3 (49.2–73.3) | 22.4 (12.1–37.8) | 26.6 (15.4–41.9) |
Policy exists | 25.4 (20.5–30.2) | 21.2 (15.0–29.0) | 22.4 (16.5–29.7) |
Note.
Analyzed from the E-cigarette School Policy Interview
95% CI run with unstratified sampling weights due to small sample sizes from the TATAMS student survey