Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Nov 19.
Published in final edited form as: Tob Control. 2020 Oct 19;30(E1):e41–e44. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2020-056171

Table 1.

VAPES MSAs and data regarding vape shop activity during COVID-19 related non-essential business closures, n=156

MSA, tate Total n (%)* Permanently closed n (%) Temporarily closed n (%) Pick-up only n (%) Home delivery only n (%) Pick-up/ home delivery n (%) Open as usual n (%)

All MSAs 156 (100.0) 18 (11.5) 6 (3.8) 41 (26.3) 2 (1.3) 6 (3.8) 83 (53.2)
Boston, Massachusetts 22 (14.1) 5 (22.7) 5 (22.7) 4 (18.2) 0 1 (4.5) 7 (31.8)
Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota 55 (35.3) 5 (9.1) 0 33 (60.0) 2 (3.6) 3 (5.5) 12 (21.8)
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 24 (15.4) 0 0 3 (12.5) 0 2 (8.3) 19 (79.2)
San Diego, California 12 (7.7) 0 0 0 0 0 12 (100.0)
Seattle, Washington 43 (27.6) 8 (18.6) 1 (2.3) 1 (2.3) 0 0 33 (76.7)
Phone verified 82 (52.6) 16 (19.5) 2 (2.4) 22 (26.8) 2 (2.4) 2 (2.4) 38 (46.3)
Website verified 74 (47.4) 2 (2.7) 4 (5.4) 19 (25.7) 0 4 (5.4) 45 (60.8)

This sample of 156 vape shops resided across 86 local jurisdictions (Boston: 11; Minneapolis-St. Paul: 40; Oklahoma City: 9; San Diego: 8; and Seattle: 18).

*

Indicates column %; all others are row %. Atlanta, Georgia excluded (see Methods)

MSAs, metropolitan statistical areas; VAPES, Vape shop Advertising, Place characteristics and Effects Surveillance.