Table 5 Predictors for compliance with alcohol purchasing regulations; alcohol policy compliance among retailers in Bhutan, 2019–2020
From: Alcohol policy compliance among retailers in Bhutan: a multisite community intervention study
| Â | Model 1 | Model 2 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
OR | SE | p- value | 95% CI | OR | SE | p-value | 95% CI | |||
Post-intervention (compared to pre) | 3.98 | 1.00 | 0.00 | 2.44 | 6.51 | 1.66 | 0.54 | 0.12 | 0.87 | 3.13 |
Legal purchase | 1.49 | 0.64 | 0.36 | 0.64 | 3.48 | 2.10 | 1.08 | 0.15 | 0.77 | 5.73 |
Outlet type | ||||||||||
 Bars/Karaoke | 1.00 | – | – | – | – | 1.00 | – | – | – | – |
 Hotel/lodge | 1.99 | 0.85 | 0.11 | 0.86 | 4.62 | 1.76 | 0.82 | 0.23 | 0.70 | 4.38 |
 Restaurant | 2.12 | 0.59 | 0.01 | 1.22 | 3.66 | 2.22 | 0.66 | 0.01 | 1.23 | 3.99 |
 Grocery | 0.81 | 0.27 | 0.53 | 0.42 | 1.56 | 0.55 | 0.21 | 0.13 | 0.26 | 1.18 |
 Other | 1.12 | 0.53 | 0.81 | 0.44 | 2.82 | 1.44 | 0.80 | 0.52 | 0.48 | 4.26 |
Server position | ||||||||||
 Manager/Owner | 1.00 | – | – | – | – | 1.00 | – | – | – | – |
 Waiter | 1.07 | 0.52 | 0.90 | 0.41 | 2.79 | 0.94 | 0.49 | 0.91 | 0.34 | 2.62 |
Sex of server | ||||||||||
 Male | 1.00 | – | – | – | – | 1.00 | – | – | – | – |
 Female | 1.80 | 0.49 | 0.03 | 1.05 | 3.08 | 1.69 | 0.51 | 0.08 | 0.94 | 3.05 |
Presumed age of the server | ||||||||||
 30 and over | 1.00 | – | – | – | – | 1.00 | – | – | – | – |
 Less than 30 | 1.08 | 0.33 | 0.81 | 0.59 | 1.98 | 0.92 | 0.31 | 0.79 | 0.48 | 1.76 |
Alcohol beverage asked for | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | |
 Beer | 1.00 | – | – | – | – | 1.00 | – | – | – | – |
 Hard Drinks | 1.91 | 0.51 | 0.02 | 1.13 | 3.23 | 1.72 | 0.50 | 0.06 | 0.97 | 3.04 |
 Other | 1.10 | 0.36 | 0.77 | 0.58 | 2.09 | 1.04 | 0.35 | 0.90 | 0.54 | 2.03 |
Customer flow of establishment | ||||||||||
 Idle | 1.00 | – | – | – | – | 1.00 | – | – | – | – |
 Engaged but not busy | 0.57 | 0.14 | 0.02 | 0.36 | 0.91 | 0.68 | 0.18 | 0.13 | 0.40 | 1.13 |
 Very busy | 0.12 | 0.07 | 0.00 | 0.04 | 0.36 | 0.15 | 0.09 | 0.00 | 0.05 | 0.46 |
General condition of establishment | ||||||||||
 Good | 1.00 | – | – | – | – | 1.00 |  |  |  |  |
 Fair | 1.39 | 0.46 | 0.32 | 0.73 | 2.65 | 1.63 | 0.60 | 0.19 | 0.79 | 3.36 |
 Poor | 0.87 | 0.57 | 0.84 | 0.24 | 3.17 | 1.52 | 1.11 | 0.57 | 0.36 | 6.37 |
Lighting of establishment | ||||||||||
 Poorly lit | 1.00 | – | – | – | – | 1.00 | – | – | – | – |
 Fairly Lit | 1.03 | 0.54 | 0.95 | 0.37 | 2.90 | 2.41 | 1.70 | 0.21 | 0.61 | 9.60 |
 Well Lit | 1.35 | 0.81 | 0.62 | 0.42 | 4.35 | 2.74 | 2.12 | 0.20 | 0.60 | 12.52 |
Establishment displayed any type of alcohol prohibition signage | ||||||||||
 No | – | – | – | – | – | 1.00 | – | – | – | – |
 Yes | – | – | – | – | – | 3.01 | 0.89 | 0.00 | 1.69 | 5.36 |
Placement of signage was prominent | ||||||||||
 No | – | – | – | – | – | 1.00 | – | – | – | – |
 Yes | – | – | – | – | – | 0.75 | 0.44 | 0.63 | 0.24 | 2.38 |
Establishment displayed smoking prohibition signage | Â | |||||||||
 No | – | – | – | – | – | 1.00 | – | – | – | – |
 Yes | – | – | – | – | – | 1.08 | 0.73 | 0.91 | 0.29 | 4.09 |