A National Assessment of On-premise Drinking Establishments Near Public Universities: Drink Prices, Drink Specials, Indoor Tobacco Use, and State-level Alcohol Laws

Overview

Journal Alcohol Clin Exp Res

Specialty Psychiatry

Date 2022 Sep 13

PMID 36098371

Authors

Cassidy R LoParco

Andrew Walker

Melvin D Livingston

Bita Khoshhal

Kwynn M Gonzalez-Pons

Eric Soule

Ryan Treffers

Matthew E Rossheim

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Inexpensive drinks and price promotions increase alcohol consumption and have been observed at on-premise drinking establishments near large colleges. Some bars may sell tobacco products and allow indoor tobacco use to encourage patrons to stay and drink more. This study examined drink prices/specials and associated practices of on-premise drinking establishments including tobacco sales and policies regarding tobacco use.

Methods: In 2018, telephone calls about prices/practices were made to 403 randomly selected bars/nightclubs within 2 miles of large residential universities in each U.S. state. The Alcohol Policy Information System provided data on state-level alcohol laws. Multivariable linear and logistic regression models examined associations between alcohol prices/specials, state laws, and establishment practices.

Results: The average price for the least expensive draft beer and a vodka shot at each location were $3.62 (SD = $1.15) and $4.77 (SD = $1.16), respectively. Most establishments (65%) had happy hour specials, 6% had 2-for-1 specials, 91% sold food, 9% sold cigarettes, 8% allowed smoking indoors, and 18% permitted electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use indoors. Allowing e-cigarette use indoors (b = -0.54) and selling cigarettes (b = -0.79) were associated with lower vodka prices; allowing cigarette smoking indoors (b = -0.46) was associated with lower beer prices. Lower beer prices (OR = 1.38), selling food (OR = 2.97), and no state law banning happy hour specials altogether (OR = 4.24) or with full-day price reduction exemptions (OR = 12.74) were associated with higher odds of having happy hour specials. Allowing e-cigarette use indoors was associated with having 2-for-1 specials (OR = 6.38).

Conclusion: In bars near large public universities, beers and shots were often available for less than $5 and drink specials were prevalent. Further, some establishments allowed tobacco use indoors and/or sold cigarettes. Laws that increase alcohol taxes, set minimum drink prices, and ban the sale and indoor use of tobacco products at on-premise drinking locations are important harm reduction tools.

Citing Articles

Alcohol to-go sales policies at on-premise drinking establishments near large public US universities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Rosen E, Walker A, Trangenstein P, LoParco C, Livingston M, Barry A Alcohol Alcohol. 2024; 59(3).

PMID: 38632828 PMC: 11024479. DOI: 10.1093/alcalc/agae023.

References

Anderson P, ODonnell A, Kaner E, Llopis E, Manthey J, Rehm J . Impact of minimum unit pricing on alcohol purchases in Scotland and Wales: controlled interrupted time series analyses. Lancet Public Health. 2021; 6(8):e557-e565. DOI: 10.1016/S2468-2667(21)00052-9. View

Thombs D, Dodd V, Pokorny S, Omli M, OMara R, Webb M . Drink specials and the intoxication levels of patrons exiting college bars. Am J Health Behav. 2007; 32(4):411-9. DOI: 10.5555/ajhb.2008.32.4.411. View

Chen M, Gruenewald P, Remer L . Does alcohol outlet density affect youth access to alcohol?. J Adolesc Health. 2009; 44(6):582-9. PMC: 2736854. DOI: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.10.136. View

Hiler M, Spindle T, Dick D, Eissenberg T, Breland A, Soule E . Reasons for Transition From Electronic Cigarette Use to Cigarette Smoking Among Young Adult College Students. J Adolesc Health. 2019; 66(1):56-63. PMC: 6935466. DOI: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.09.003. View

Wagenaar A, Salois M, Komro K . Effects of beverage alcohol price and tax levels on drinking: a meta-analysis of 1003 estimates from 112 studies. Addiction. 2009; 104(2):179-90. DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02438.x. View

Ramchandani V, Kwo P, Li T . Effect of food and food composition on alcohol elimination rates in healthy men and women. J Clin Pharmacol. 2002; 41(12):1345-50. DOI: 10.1177/00912700122012814. View

Toomey T, Wagenaar A . Policy options for prevention: the case of alcohol. J Public Health Policy. 1999; 20(2):192-213. View

Dierker L, Lloyd-Richardson E, Stolar M, Flay B, Tiffany S, Collins L . The proximal association between smoking and alcohol use among first year college students. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2005; 81(1):1-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2005.05.012. View

Stockwell T, Zhao J, Giesbrecht N, MacDonald S, Thomas G, Wettlaufer A . The raising of minimum alcohol prices in Saskatchewan, Canada: impacts on consumption and implications for public health. Am J Public Health. 2012; 102(12):e103-10. PMC: 3519328. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2012.301094. View

10.

Kuo M, Wechsler H, Greenberg P, Lee H . The marketing of alcohol to college students: the role of low prices and special promotions. Am J Prev Med. 2003; 25(3):204-11. DOI: 10.1016/s0749-3797(03)00200-9. View

11.

Cronce J, Toomey T, Lenk K, Nelson T, Kilmer J, Larimer M . NIAAA's College Alcohol Intervention Matrix. Alcohol Res. 2018; 39(1):43-47. PMC: 6104959. View

12.

Chaloupka F, Grossman M, Saffer H . The effects of price on alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems. Alcohol Res Health. 2002; 26(1):22-34. PMC: 6683806. View

13.

ODonnell A, Anderson P, Jane-Llopis E, Manthey J, Kaner E, Rehm J . Immediate impact of minimum unit pricing on alcohol purchases in Scotland: controlled interrupted time series analysis for 2015-18. BMJ. 2019; 366:l5274. PMC: 6759563. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.l5274. View

14.

Reed M, Wang R, Shillington A, Clapp J, Lange J . The relationship between alcohol use and cigarette smoking in a sample of undergraduate college students. Addict Behav. 2006; 32(3):449-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.05.016. View

15.

Trangenstein P, Wall P, Jernigan D . Collateral damage from college drinking: A conceptual framework for alcohol's harms to others among US college students. Subst Use Misuse. 2019; 54(8):1297-1308. PMC: 6510638. DOI: 10.1080/10826084.2019.1573836. View

16.

Gruenewald P, Ponicki W, Holder H, Romelsjo A . Alcohol prices, beverage quality, and the demand for alcohol: quality substitutions and price elasticities. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2006; 30(1):96-105. DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2006.00011.x. View

17.

Rice P, Drummond C . The price of a drink: the potential of alcohol minimum unit pricing as a public health measure in the UK. Br J Psychiatry. 2012; 201(3):169-71. DOI: 10.1192/bjp.bp.111.105601. View

18.

Edwards G, Anderson P, Babor T, Casswell S, Ferrence R, Giesbrecht N . Alcohol policy and the public good: a good public debate. Addiction. 1996; 91(4):477-81. View

19.

Puac-Polanco V, Keyes K, Mauro P, Branas C . A Systematic Review of Drink Specials, Drink Special Laws, and Alcohol-Related Outcomes. Curr Epidemiol Rep. 2020; 7(4):300-314. PMC: 7755127. DOI: 10.1007/s40471-020-00247-0. View

20.

Orbell S, Lidierth P, Henderson C, Geeraert N, Uller C, Uskul A . Social-cognitive beliefs, alcohol, and tobacco use: a prospective community study of change following a ban on smoking in public places. Health Psychol. 2009; 28(6):753-61. DOI: 10.1037/a0016943. View