O2115: Puff ‘n’ Play: Examination of Youth Perspectives on Enticing Novel Vape Designs

Background: In 2020, the FDA banned flavored vapes to deter vaping amongst underaged individuals (UI). However, disposable vapes continue to be exempt to this ban. In addition to flavors, many manufacturers are using toy-like designs and gamified features to entice UI (Figure 1). While the FDA has warned some manufacturers to discontinue these “fun vapes” (FV), they are readily available through both physical and online retailers. This study seeks to investigate how adolescents respond to FV designs and whether they increase the appeal of vaping.

Methods: Images of 35 FV and 15 standard vapes (SV) were shown to a diverse youth focus group (n=9) 33% male, 56% < 21, 44% 21-22. FV were sorted into 2 subtypes: “toy” vapes and “functional” vapes with additional non-vape functions. Participants were informed of vape- and non-vape-related functions, flavors, and models. They then rated a series of statements on a 5-point Likert scale (Table 1). Ratings were summed to get a mean response score (MRS) for each vape, a low score (min=5) indicating a normal vape and a high score (max=25) indicating a vape they would try because it appeared enticing/specifically marketed towards UI. Data was analyzed in R.

Results: The MRS for the FV (19.74, 95% CI: [19.46, 20.01]) was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than MRS of the SV (13.03, 95% CI: [12.71, 13.35]). The MRS for the toy vapes (19.60, 95% CI: [19.36, 19.84]) did not significantly differ (p=0.25) from the MRS of the functional vapes (20.01, 95% CI: [19.35, 20.67]). FV were rated the same regardless of additional functions. MRS in the 21+ group were higher for fun (20.31, 95% CI: [19.81, 20.82], p< 0.05) and standard (14.40, 95% CI: [13.19, 15.61], p< 0.05) vapes when compared to the MRS of the < 21 group. 16% of responses for SV compared to 71% of responses for FV rated them as “not easily recognizable to adults” (Table 1).

Conclusion: These results indicate a concerning trend in the appeal of new vape designs to UI. The significantly higher MRS for FV compared to SV suggests that unique designs and features attract UI, and could lead to increased usage. The 21+ group rated all vapes as more marketed to UI and were more inclined to use them. Combined with the appeal of fun flavor options, these results demonstrate a need for more regulatory oversight. FV’s covert design further emphasizes the danger of FV and highlights the need for parent and teacher vigilance. Ultimately, a combination of stronger regulation and education is necessary to address the dangers that FV pose to UI.