Medical Cannabis Users Research Articles

Haven't I waited long enough? The role of wait times and subjective impairment in cannabis-related driving behavior

BackgroundDriving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC) poses a significant public health threat. This study explores DUIC through a multifaceted lens, examining correlates of various wait times between cannabis use and driving, subjective perceptions of impairment, and differences between medical and non-medical cannabis users. MethodCross-sectional data from 979 cannabis users in Israel were collected through an online survey. DUIC risk was measured using reported wait times (categorized as low, moderate, and high risk) and driving while feeling cannabis effects. Logistic and multinomial regression identified correlates of DUIC risk. Results23 % of the respondents drove within two hours of use (high risk), 37 % waited 3 to 6 h (moderate risk), and 40 % waited over 7 h (low risk). Multinomial regression showed that being male (RRR = 2.11, p < 0.001), having a medical cannabis license (RRR = 4.14, p < 0.01), more frequent cannabis and alcohol co-use (RRR = 1.18, p < 0.05), and more frequent cannabis use (RRR = 1.21, p < 0.001) were associated with moderate risk compared to low risk. Being male (RRR = 1.89, p < 0.01) and reporting higher cannabis use frequency (RRR = 1.70, p < 0.001) was associated with high DUIC risk. Cannabis use frequency was a significant predictor of subjective DUIC (AOR = 1.26, p < 0.001). ConclusionFindings highlight the need for targeted prevention efforts, particularly for male and frequent cannabis users. The complex relationship between medical cannabis use and DUIC risk warrants further investigation to inform evidence-based policies and interventions.

Emerging trends in cannabis administration for women with chronic pain

AbstractCannabis use among women who experience chronic pain is on the rise in the United States. However, little is known about women's motives and preferences for cannabis administration. The purpose of this study was to characterize cannabis use among women with chronic pain. This study examined self‐reported forms of cannabis administration and preferred source of cannabis, frequency and quantity of use, and self‐reported side effects, and type, level, and intensity of chronic pain among adult women in the United States. This study also compared women who use cannabis for chronic pain and those who do not across the level of chronic pain, length of chronic pain, and the number of types of chronic pain experienced. Participants showed a significant preference (60%) for using recreational cannabis to treat chronic pain but reported that medical cannabis was more effective. For participants who preferred medical cannabis 24.3% reported daily use, as compared to only 7.8% of recreational cannabis users. Smoking was the most common form of administration (62.1%), followed by edibles (25.3%), vaporizing in any form (7.4%), tinctures and concentrates (3.2%), and topicals (2.1%). Participants reported using 1–6 different forms of cannabis administration. Those who preferred smoking were significantly likely to use all other forms of administration. However, those who preferred alternatives to smoking were significantly likely to use all forms of administration except for smoking. Medical cannabis users preferred to obtain cannabis from a dispensary, while recreational users preferred to obtain cannabis from unlicensed sources. Additionally, participants who used cannabis for chronic pain reported a 74% reduction in past 30‐day opioid use. Future research is needed to investigate the health effects associated with single and combined forms of cannabis administration for women with chronic pain. Results can inform educational and intervention programs, treatment development, content regulation of products, policy formation, women's health research, and public health guidelines.

Views and practices on medical cannabis of unlicensed providers in Thailand: a qualitative study

Background Despite the legalization of cannabis use for medical purposes in Thailand in February 2019, illicit providers are still widespread and accessible. This study aimed to understand why people still chose to receive medical cannabis treatment or products from unlicensed or illegal providers. The practices of unlicensed or illegal providers in provision of medical cannabis products or treatment services were also examined. Methods Qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted among medical cannabis providers and users, including 36 unlicensed and 7 licensed providers and 25 users in 2019-2021. Snowball sampling was used to recruit participants until saturation of data was achieved. Interviews included open-ended questions about the providers’ practices and attitudes towards medical cannabis. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and thematic analysis was performed. Results Overall, six reasons were identified to answer why unlicensed/illicit providers were still popular, including: 1) easy accessibility; 2) familiarity with the unlicensed providers before the legal scheme became available; 3) favorable characters (kind, supportive, non-judgmental) of unlicensed providers; 4) affordable treatment fees; 5) trust in the quality of the medicines; and 6) lack of knowledge and negative attitudes towards cannabis from healthcare professionals. Most providers started their career as medical cannabis providers by using it themselves or with their relatives and being satisfied with the results. They used cannabis products to treat all diseases, including skin, eyes, HIV/AIDS, non-communicable diseases and all kinds of cancers. Additionally, they believed that it was effective, with no or minimal adverse effects. Conclusions This study suggests that some patients will continue receiving medical cannabis treatment and products from unlicensed or illegal providers. More attention should be paid on increasing the capacity of medical cannabis service systems within public health hospitals, and the certification of unlicensed providers, so as to integrate them into a regulated system.

Data quality in a survey of registered medical cannabis users with cancer: nonresponse and measurement error.

Cannabis use among individuals with cancer is best understood using survey self-report. As cannabis remains federally illegal, surveys could be subject to nonresponse and measurement issues impacting data quality. We surveyed individuals using medical cannabis for a cancer-related condition in the Minnesota Medical Cannabis Program (MCP). Although survey responders are older, there are no differences by race and ethnicity, gender, or receipt of reduced cannabis registry enrollment fee. Responders made a more recent purchase and more recently completed an independent symptom assessment for the registry than nonresponders, suggesting some opportunity for nonresponse error. Among responders, self-report and MCP administrative data with respect to age, race, gender, registry certification, and cannabis purchase history were similar. Responders were less likely to report receipt of Medicaid than would be expected based on registry low-income enrollment eligibility. Although attention should be paid to potential for nonresponse error, surveys are a reliable tool to ascertain cannabis behavior patterns in this population.

Reasons for Use and Perceived Effects of Medical Cannabis: A Cross-Sectional Statewide Survey

Plain Language SummaryIn Florida, USA, medical cannabis (MC) is accessible for certified individuals with specific health conditions. Previous research found that many people seek MC for conditions beyond the officially approved ones. We aimed to understand the alignment between qualifying conditions per statute, the reasons patients reported for using MC, and the perceived impacts on health conditions and symptoms. In a 2022 survey of 632 MC users, the top reported qualifying conditions were post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), medical condition comparable to listed conditions, and chronic nonmalignant pain. The top ten self-reported reasons for using MC were anxiety, chronic pain, depression, PTSD, headaches/migraine, fibromyalgia, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), bipolar disorder, high blood pressure, and cancer. Many patients reported multiple reasons for MC use, including typically one reason that matched their reported qualifying condition. Most respondents noted improvements in anxiety, depression, chronic pain, insomnia, PTSD, headaches/migraine, ADHD, bipolar disorder, and fibromyalgia. These findings suggest that in addition to the officially recognized qualifying conditions, people often use MC for a broader range of conditions and symptoms, some of which are not included in the current statute and/or without evidence of efficacy.

Impact of Medical Cannabis on Recovery from Playing-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders in Musicians: An Observational Cohort Study.

Playing-related musculoskeletal disorders (PRMDs) are musculoskeletal symptoms that interfere with the ability to play at the level a musician is accustomed to. Musicians have an 84% lifetime prevalence of PRMD. Many types of analgesia are inappropriate for this population due to their risks, but cannabidiol (CBD) has been shown to have anti-inflammatory properties and can reduce the perception of pain. Medical cannabis has also been shown to be safer than other analgesia in terms of serious adverse events. This study explores the impact of medical cannabis for PRMD on perceptions of pain and mental health outcomes. Participants (n = 204) completed questionnaires at baseline and six months: the Musculoskeletal Pain Intensity and Interference Questionnaire for Musicians (MPIIQM) and Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). Participants self-selected their group: non-cannabis users (n = 42), new medical cannabis users (n = 61), and long-term medical cannabis users (n = 101). Data were analyzed using paired t-tests for within-group and ANOVA for between-group differences. At six months, there was no difference (p = 0.579) in cannabidiol dose between new (24.87 ± 12.86 mg) and long-term users (21.48 ± 12.50 mg). There was a difference in tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) dose (p = 0.003) between new (3.74 ± 4.22 mg) and long-term users (4.41 ± 5.18 mg). At six months, new cannabis users had a significant reduction in pain intensity as measured by The Musculoskeletal Pain Intensity and Interference Questionnaire for Musicians (MPIIQM40) (p = 0.002). Non-users (p = 0.035), new users (p = 0.002), and long-term cannabis users (p = 0.009) all had significant reductions in pain interference (MPIIQM50) at six months. At six months, non-cannabis (p = 0.022) and long-term cannabis users (p = 0.001) had an improvement in DASS-21. The change in pain intensity was the only difference between groups, F(2, 201) = 3.845, p = 0.023. This difference was between long-term (0.83 ± 0.79) and new users (-2.61 ± 7.15). No serious adverse events occurred, and a minority experienced tiredness, cough, and dry mouth. This practice-based evidence demonstrated that the multidimensional approach to care provided by the Musicians' Clinics of Canada benefited all groups at six months. Medical cannabis significantly reduced pain intensity in new users of medical cannabis with PRMD, and all groups saw improvements in pain interference. In keeping with prior studies, medical cannabis seems to be effective at reducing perceptions of pain, including for PRMD. CBD/THC dosing was within guideline recommendations, and no patients experienced any serious adverse events. Limitations include multiple factors impacting patients' decisions to opt in or out of medical cannabis. These include cost, comorbidities, and disease chronicity. In conclusion, medical cannabis reduces pain intensity in new users, and when combined with a multidimensional approach to care, patients with PRMD can see improvements in pain as well as mental wellbeing.

Cannabis use in the UK: a quantitative comparison of individual differences in medical and recreational cannabis users.

There is a paucity of research, especially in the UK, that investigates individual differences in both medical and recreational cannabis users. A cross-sectional survey study design was used to assess recreational cannabis users and medical cannabis users currently living in the UK. Recreational cannabis users were invited to take part via social media. Medical cannabis users were recruited from Sapphire Medical Clinics, London, UK, which provides treatment with prescribed cannabis-based medicinal products. Demographic data and cannabis use frequency, as well as post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms (PCL-5), depression symptoms (Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale), trait and state anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory), and cannabis use motives [Comprehensive Marijuana Motives Questionnaire (CMMQ)] were collected. The Chi-square and independent-sample t-tests were used for the comparison of categorical variables and normally distributed continuous variables. Data were analyzed using analyses of variance (ANOVAs) and t-tests. Statistical significance was considered where the value of p was <0.05. The survey was completed by 161 participants. Medical cannabis users were older, consumed cannabis more often, had a higher "Sleep" motive on the CMMQ, and had a higher prevalence in self-reporting current diagnoses of neurological problems, mood disorders, and anxiety disorders (p < 0.05). Recreational cannabis users had higher scores on several motives for use (e.g., "Enjoyment," "Coping," "Experimentation," "Boredom," and "Celebration") and higher state anxiety scores (p < 0.05). The most common motives for cannabis use in both groups were "Enjoyment," "Low Risk," and "Sleep." There were no differences between groups in gender, "Low-Risk" motive, post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, depression scores, trait anxiety scores, self-reported prevalence of substance use-related disorders, and past consumption of alcohol, tobacco, or caffeine (p > 0.05). The current study not only demonstrates a difference in age and motivations for cannabis consumption between recreational and medical cannabis users but also shows areas of potential overlap, including mental health outcomes, past substance use, and gender. These UK-specific findings indicate that recreational cannabis users experience higher state anxiety, highlighting the need for further evaluation of potential anxiogenic/anxiolytic properties of cannabis. These findings demonstrate the importance of researching individual differences in cannabis users and hold significant implications for future research, clinical practice, and legislation.

Individuals' Values and Preferences Regarding Medical Cannabis for Chronic Pain: A Descriptive Qualitative Study.

Cannabis for medical purposes has been legal in Canada since 2001; however, physicians receive no formal training in this modality, and clinical use of cannabis remains controversial. This study aims to explore the values and preferences of people living with chronic pain (PLwCP) in using medical cannabis for chronic pain to inform guideline development and shared decision-making in clinical practice. We conducted a descriptive qualitative study using in-depth interviews with PLwCP. Using a deductive/inductive approach, we developed concepts and themes related to values and preferences of PLwCP on their use (or avoidance) of medical cannabis for chronic pain. We interviewed 52 PLwCP, including current medical cannabis users (40), previous users (10) and non-users (2). Most PLwCP who used cannabis therapeutically reported the need for experimentation to determine what cannabis products, routes, and doses worked for them. Perceived benefits of medical cannabis among current users included relief from pain, better sleep, and improved mental health. Reasons for discontinuing use of medical cannabis included lack of improvement in pain or sleep or undesirable side effects. Cannabidiol (CBD) dominant products were reported to result in minimal adverse effects (eg, physical or mental impairment) compared to tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) dominant products. Perceived barriers or facilitators to use included social acceptability, availability or access, cost, and attitudes and knowledge among healthcare providers. Participants noted different routes of cannabis use including oral routes that provided longer-lasting pain relief with a slower onset and inhaled routes with a more rapid onset with shorter-lived effects. Participants' decisions to use medical cannabis for chronic pain were varied, which suggests these decisions are likely to be sensitive to individuals' values and preferences. There is a call for further research and information-sharing to help PLwCP understand the complexities of cannabis use for medical purposes, including ideal dosing and timing.

Views and practices on medical cannabis of unlicensed providers in Thailand: a qualitative study.

Despite the legalization of cannabis use for medical purposes in Thailand in February 2019, illicit providers are still widespread and accessible. This study aimed to understand why people still chose to receive medical cannabis treatment or products from unlicensed or illegal providers. The practices of unlicensed or illegal providers in provision of medical cannabis products or treatment services were also examined. Qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted among medical cannabis providers and users, including 36 unlicensed and 7 licensed providers and 25 users in 2019-2021. Snowball sampling was used to recruit participants until saturation of data was achieved. Interviews included open-ended questions about the providers' practices and attitudes towards medical cannabis. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and thematic analysis was performed. Overall, six reasons were identified to answer why unlicensed/illicit providers were still popular, including: 1) easy accessibility; 2) familiarity with the unlicensed providers before the legal scheme became available; 3) favorable characters (kind, supportive, non-judgmental) of unlicensed providers; 4) affordable treatment fees; 5) trust in the quality of the medicines; and 6) lack of knowledge and negative attitudes towards cannabis from healthcare professionals. Most providers started their career as medical cannabis providers by using it themselves or with their relatives and being satisfied with the results. They used cannabis products to treat all diseases, including skin, eyes, HIV/AIDS, non-communicable diseases and all kinds of cancers. Additionally, they believed that it was effective, with no or minimal adverse effects. This study suggests that some patients will continue receiving medical cannabis treatment and products from unlicensed or illegal providers. More attention should be paid on increasing the capacity of medical cannabis service systems within public health hospitals, and the certification of unlicensed providers, so as to integrate them into a regulated system.

Views and practices on medical cannabis of unlicensed providers in Thailand: a qualitative study

Background: Despite the legalization of cannabis use for medical purposes in Thailand in February 2019, illicit providers are still widespread and accessible. This study aimed to understand why people still chose to receive medical cannabis treatment or products from unlicensed or illegal providers. The practices of unlicensed or illegal providers in provision of medical cannabis products or treatment services were also examined. Methods: Qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted among medical cannabis providers and users, including 36 unlicensed and 7 licensed providers and 25 users in 2019-2021. Snowball sampling was used to recruit participants until saturation of data was achieved. Interviews included open-ended questions about the providers’ practices and attitudes towards medical cannabis. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and thematic analysis was performed. Results: Overall, six reasons were identified to answer why unlicensed/illicit providers were still popular, including: 1) easy accessibility; 2) familiarity with the unlicensed providers before the legal scheme became available; 3) favorable characters (kind, supportive, non-judgmental) of unlicensed providers; 4) affordable treatment fees; 5) trust in the quality of the medicines; and 6) lack of knowledge and negative attitudes towards cannabis from healthcare professionals. Most providers started their career as medical cannabis providers by using it themselves or with their relatives and being satisfied with the results. They used cannabis products to treat all diseases, including skin, eyes, HIV/AIDS, non-communicable diseases and all kinds of cancers. Additionally, they believed that it was effective, with no or minimal adverse effects. Conclusions: This study suggests that some patients will continue receiving medical cannabis treatment and products from unlicensed or illegal providers. More attention should be paid on increasing the capacity of medical cannabis service systems within public health hospitals, and the certification of unlicensed providers, so as to integrate them into a regulated system.

Driving-related behaviors, attitudes, and perceptions among Australian medical cannabis users: results from the CAMS 20 survey

Road safety is an important concern amidst expanding worldwide access to legal cannabis. The present study reports on the driving-related subsection of the Cannabis as Medicine Survey 2020 (CAMS-20) which surveyed driving-related behaviors, attitudes, and perceptions among Australian medical cannabis (MC) users. Of the 1063 respondents who reported driving a motor vehicle in the past 12 months, 28% (297/1063) reported driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC). Overall, 49–56% of respondents said they typically drive within 6 h of MC use, depending on the route of administration (oral or inhaled). Non-medical cannabis (NMC) was perceived to be more impairing for driving than MC. Binary logistic regression revealed associations between likelihood of DUIC and (1) inhaled routes of cannabis administration, (2) THC-dominant products, (3) illicit rather than prescribed use, (4) believing NMC does not impair driving, and (5) not being deterred by roadside drug testing. Overall, these findings suggest there is a relatively low perception of driving-related risk among MC users. Targeted education programs may be needed to highlight the potential risks associated with DUIC, and further research is needed to determine whether driving performance is differentially affected by MC and NMC.

Medical Cannabis Use Patterns and Adverse Effects in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

To investigate medical cannabis (MC) use patterns and adverse effects in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). MC is now legal in many states. Although previous studies suggest improvement in disease activity among IBD patients using MC, use patterns and adverse effects are unclear. A cross-sectional anonymous survey was conducted (October 23, 2020 to January 24, 2021) among patients accessing MC dispensaries in New York and Minnesota. Eligibility criteria: age 18 years or older, selfreported IBD diagnosis, MC dispensary purchase. Survey questions included IBD characteristics, MC and healthcare utilization, and MC effects/adverse events. Participant characteristics were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Utilization patterns and symptoms before and after MC use were compared using the Stuart Maxwell test. Of 236 respondents, overall IBD disease activity was mild-to-moderate. Most respondents (61.0%) took a biological. Median frequency of MC use was at least once within the past week. Most respondents used products with high Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol content (87.5%) through vape pens/cartridges (78.6%). Respondents reported fewer emergency room visits in the 12 months after versus before MC use (35.2 vs 41.5%, P <0.01) and less impact of symptoms on daily life. Most respondents reported euphoria with MC use (75.4%). The other common side effects were feeling drowsy, groggy, or with memory lapses (4.2%), dry mouth/eyes (3.4%), and anxiety/depression or paranoia (3.4%). Few respondents reported MC diversion (1.3%). MC users with IBD perceive symptom benefits and report decreased emergency room visits without serious adverse effects. Further studies are needed to confirm these results with objective measures of healthcare utilization and disease activity.

Investigating predictors of driving immediately after consuming cannabis: A study of medical and recreational cannabis users in Australia

This study aimed to explore the length of time cannabis users typically wait between drug consumption and driving a vehicle, and what factors influence such decisions. A total of 839 Australian cannabis users participated in an online survey (26.3% had a prescription for cannabis). Participants ranged in age between 18 years and 75 years (M = 43.3) and 38.2% were female. Driving immediately after consuming cannabis was reported by 41.6% of the sample and waiting 1 h was the next most common response (17%). About one-quarter of participants reported that they waited at least 4 h, thus driving at a time they may no longer be impaired (26.8%). Factors that predicted waiting less time included: a greater frequency of drug consumption (times per day and per month), earlier age of cannabis use onset, using cannabis without a prescription, reporting past-year driving within four hours of consuming cannabis with an illegal drug, and lower perceptions of risk related to driving after consuming cannabis. Participants were asked to report how many days in the next year they would drive within four hours of cannabis consumption, with the most common response being 365 days (37.9% of sample). Given cannabis use is likely to increase through impending decriminalisation and expansion of prescription access, identifying ways to educate cannabis users and extend the length of time they wait between consumption and driving is critical for road safety.

Protocol of a Combined Cohort and Cross-Sectional Study of Persons Receiving Medical Cannabis in Florida, USA: The Medical Marijuana and Me (M3) Study

Significant knowledge gaps regarding the effectiveness and safety of medical cannabis (MC) create clinical challenges for MC physicians, making treatment recommendations and patients choosing treatment among the growing number of options offered in dispensaries. Additionally, data describing the characteristics of people who use MC and the products and doses they receive are lacking. The Medical Marijuana and Me (M3) Study was designed to collect patient-centered data from MC users. We aim to describe preferred MC use patterns that patients report as “most effective” for specific health conditions and symptoms, identify user characteristics associated with such use patterns, characterize adverse effects, including cannabis use disorder, identify products and patient characteristics associated with adverse effects, describe concurrent prescription medication use, and identify concomitant medication use with potential drug-MC interaction risk. Among MC initiators, we also aim to quantify MC use persistence and identify reasons for discontinuation, assess MC utilization pattern trajectories over time, describe outcome trajectories of primary reasons for MC use and determine factors associated with different trajectories, track changes in concomitant substance and medication use after MC initiation, and identify factors associated with such changes. M3 is a combined study comprised of: (1) a prospective cohort of MC initiators completing surveys at enrollment, 3 months, and 9 months after MC initiation and (2) a cross-sectional study of current MC users. A multidisciplinary committee including researchers, physicians, pharmacists, patients, and dispensary personnel designed and planned study protocols, established study measures, and created survey questionnaires. M3 will recruit 1,000–1,200 participants aged ≥18 years, with ∼50% new and ∼50% current MC patients from MC clinics across Florida, USA. Study enrollment started in May 2022 and will continue until the target number of patients is achieved. Survey domains include sociodemographic characteristics, physical and mental health, cannabis use history, reasons for MC use and discontinuation, MC products and use patterns, concurrent use of prescription medications and other substances, and side effects. Data collected in the M3 Study will be available for interested researchers affiliated with the Consortium for Medical Marijuana Clinical Outcomes Research. The M3 Study and Databank will be the largest cohort of current and new MC users in Florida, USA, which will provide data to support MC-related health research necessary to inform policy and clinical practice and ultimately improve patient outcomes.

Physicians' Attitudes and Practices Regarding Cannabis and Recommending Medical Cannabis Use.

Introduction: Medical cannabis users tend not to trust or rely on health care providers regarding cannabis advice. Previous surveys of physicians have focused on favorability toward medical cannabis. The current study assesses how physicians interact with patients regarding cannabis in their day-to-day practice, and whether and how they address important topics such as use patterns and substituting cannabis for medications. We predicted that physicians would generally perceive cannabis dispensary staff and caretakers as not competent in addressing patient health needs and would not be likely to use their recommendations. Methods: Physicians in a university-affiliated health system completed an anonymous online survey. The survey assessed physicians' cannabis related education experiences, perceptions of their knowledge of and competence regarding medical cannabis, and the content of cannabis related discussions with patients. We also examined perceptions of the sources of influence on patients regarding cannabis and physicians' attitudes toward medical cannabis dispensary staff and medical cannabis caregivers (MCCs). Results: A few physicians (10%) had ever signed a medical cannabis authorization form for their patients, consistent with their perceptions of low knowledge and competence in this area. Discussions on cannabis primarily focus on risks (63%) rather than dosage (6%) and harm reduction (25%). Physicians see their influence on patients as weak compared with other information sources and have generally unfavorable attitudes toward medical cannabis dispensary staff and MCCs. Conclusion: Greater integration of medical cannabis knowledge is needed at all levels of medical and clinical education to address the potential harm to patients if they receive no guidance. Continued research is needed to provide a strong scientific basis for developing treatment guidelines and standardized medical education for medical cannabis use.

Risk perceptions of driving under the influence of cannabis: Comparing medical and non-medical cannabis users

BackgroundReduced perception of potential harm resulting from cannabis use is associated with greater risk of driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC). Understanding risk perceptions of DUIC among subgroups of users will positively inform targeting and content of anti-DUIC driver education and public awareness campaigns. The current study compared DUIC-related risk perceptions among individuals who use cannabis exclusively for non-medical purposes versus those who use cannabis for exclusively medical or for both medical and non-medical purposes (i.e., dual-purpose users). MethodData were drawn from a regionally stratified cross-sectional general population telephone survey of adults (18 + years) in Ontario, Canada conducted in 2017. Respondents who reported past-year use of cannabis and answered questions regarding DUIC risk perceptions were selected (weighted N = 343). Modified Poisson regression models with robust standard error estimation were conducted for three attitudes: disagree that DUIC increases motor vehicle collision risk, agree that DUIC is safer than driving under the influence of alcohol (DUIA), agree that chances of being caught by police for DUIA higher than DUIC. In addition to type of cannabis user (non-medical only versus medical or dual-purpose), covariates included demographic characteristics and past-year alcohol and cannabis use frequency. ResultsAdjusting for other covariates, regression analyses indicated that medical or dual-purpose cannabis users were 45 % more likely than non-medical users to agree that DUIC is safer than DUIA (Adjusted Prevalence Ratio = 1.45, 95 %CI = 1.10, 1.91, p = 0.007). No other differences in risk perception between medical or dual-purpose and non-medical cannabis users were found. DiscussionAlthough no difference between medical or dual-purpose and non-medical cannabis users was found in perceptions of collision risk associated with DUIC or risk of police enforcement, the perception that DUIC is safer than DUIA was stronger among medical or dual-purpose than non-medical users. Recognizing that the shift in public perception of DUIA as a high-risk behaviour contributed to reductions in incidence of DUIA, results of the current study support education and awareness campaigns that target medical or dual-purpose users and emphasize that, like DUIA, DUIC is also a high-risk behaviour.

Are Younger Medical Cannabis Users at Risk? Comparing Patterns of Use and Mental Health in Younger and Older Medical Cannabis Dispensary Users

While there has been a considerable amount of research on recreational cannabis use in youth to date, much less is known about patterns of medical cannabis use in youth. Adult medical versus recreational cannabis users may differ in how they use the product on important factors such as dose, frequency and route of ingestion, and so it is important to understand whether adolescents and young adults differ in how they use medical cannabis compared to adults, and if this increases risk of impaired mental health. In the present study, one hundred members of a community cannabis dispensary who endorsed cannabis use for medical purposes were assessed for major psychiatric disorders, and completed questionnaires related to stress, depression, sleep and somatic symptoms. Detailed information about cannabis use was collected. In the sample, 35% were aged 19-24 years old, and 24% were aged 25-30 (categorized as youth/young adults). In comparison to the older medical cannabis users, there were unexpectedly few differences, both in mental health status as well as pattern of medical cannabis use. These findings contrast with those of recreational cannabis users, and indicate that medical cannabis in youth may be as effective and well-tolerated as in older adults.

Development of cannabis use disorder in medical cannabis users: A 9-month follow-up of a randomized clinical trial testing effects of medical cannabis card ownership.

Evidence for long-term effectiveness of commercial cannabis products used to treat medical symptoms is inconsistent, despite increasingly widespread use. To prospectively evaluate the effects of using cannabis on self-reported symptoms of pain, insomnia, anxiety, depression, and cannabis use disorder (CUD) after 12 months of use. This observational cohort study describes outcomes over 9 months following a 12-week randomized, waitlist-controlled trial (RCT: NCT03224468) in which adults (N = 163) who wished to use cannabis to alleviate insomnia, pain, depression, or anxiety symptoms were randomly assigned to obtain a medical marijuana card immediately (immediate card acquisition group) or to delay obtaining a card for 12 weeks delay (delayed card acquisition group). During the 9-month post-randomization period, all participants could use cannabis as they wished and choose their cannabis products, doses, and frequency of use. Insomnia, pain, depression, anxiety, and CUD symptoms were assessed over the 9-month post-randomization period. After 12 months of using cannabis for medical symptoms, 11.7% of all participants (n = 19), and 17.1% of those using cannabis daily or near-daily (n = 6) developed CUD. Frequency of cannabis use was positively correlated with pain severity and number of CUD symptoms, but not significantly associated with severity of self-reported insomnia, depression, or anxiety symptoms. Depression scores improved throughout the 9 months in all participants, regardless of cannabis use frequency. Frequency of cannabis use was not associated with improved pain, anxiety, or depression symptoms but was associated with new-onset cannabis use disorder in a significant minority of participants. Daily or near-daily cannabis use appears to have little benefit for these symptoms after 12 months of use.

Changes in Medical Cannabis Use After Recreational Cannabis Legalization in Canada.

Background: As part of its recreational cannabis legalization in October 2018, Canada imposed an excise tax of 10% (or $1 a gram, whichever is higher) on both recreational and medical cannabis. There is little evidence to inform the ongoing debate on whether the legalization had adverse impacts on medical cannabis use. Methods: We used an interrupted time series design and data on medical cannabis shipments (i.e., mail-order deliveries of cannabis from a licensed producer to a patient authorized to obtain medical cannabis) in Canada between quarter 1 of 2014 and quarter 1 of 2020. We examined changes in medical cannabis shipments after Canada's recreational cannabis legalization both across Canada and for each province. As this study used publicly available, province-level aggregate data, ethics approval was not required. Results: Recreational cannabis legalization was associated with significant reductions in medical cannabis use in 7 out of 10 Canadian provinces. Compared with the counterfactual estimated from prelegalization trends, the reduction in quarter 1 of 2020 varied from 500 shipments per 100,000 population (95% CI=312-688 shipments per 100,000 population) or 32% (95% CI=22-43%) in Newfoundland and Labrador to 3,778 shipments per 100,000 population (95% CI=2,972-4,585 shipments per 100,000 population) or 74% (95% CI=68-79%) in Alberta. At the national level, the number of medical cannabis shipments decreased by 823 per 100,000 population (95% CI=725-921 shipments per 100,000 population) or 48% (95% CI=45-52%). Conclusions: Recreational cannabis legalization was associated with reductions in medical cannabis use. Our findings call for policy attention to address possible adverse impacts of recreational cannabis legalization on medical cannabis users.

Analyzing the Perspectives of Health Professionals and Legal Cannabis Users on the Treatment of Chronic Pain With Cannabidiol: Protocol for a Scoping Review

Medical cannabis is one of the most commonly reported treatments for chronic pain. The wide acceptance and research in alternative medicine have put medical cannabis in the limelight, where researchers are widely examining its therapeutic benefits, including treatment of chronic pain. The purpose of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the perspectives on cannabidiol as an alternative treatment for chronic pain among health professionals and legal cannabis users. The framework of Arksey and O'Malley guides the design of this scoping review, and the elements reported use the recommended guidelines of the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews). A comprehensive literature search accessed the databases CINAHL Complete and MEDLINE via EBSCO, Australia/New Zealand Reference Centre, PsycINFO, Ovid Emcare, Wiley Online Library, Scopus, Informit New Zealand Collection, and Google Scholar for published literature, and then it was extended to include gray literature. Gray literature searches included searching the databases Australia/New Zealand Reference Centre, Informit New Zealand Collection, INNZ: Index New Zealand, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, and AUT Tuwhera Research Repository, and the website nzresearch.org.nz. The studies included in this scoping review were assessed for eligibility for inclusion using the following criteria: published in English after 2000, conducted in New Zealand (NZ) or Australia, and aimed to investigate the perspectives of health professionals and medical cannabis users using interviews for data collection. Studies were screened for inclusion using Covidence, a software tool to filter search results, and the risk of bias was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool. Although this is not a required step for scoping reviews, it added an element of strength to this scoping review. Data will be analyzed using thematic analysis guided by Braun and Clarke. The findings from the data analysis will be presented in a table, which will then inform the key themes for discussion. The database search started in October 2021 and was completed in December 2021. The total number of studies included in this review is 5 (n=5). Studies included were conducted in NZ or Australia and examined the perspectives using participant interviews. This scoping review is anticipated to be submitted for publication in December 2022. Using perspectives is a valuable tool to understand the challenges experienced by health professionals and medical cannabis users associated with medical cannabis treatment. Addressing these challenges through interventions that are highlighted through perspectives such as educating health professionals to increase access to medical cannabis in NZ may aid in policy reformulation for medical cannabis in the context of NZ. Thus, this scoping review highlights the importance of medical cannabis research and suggests recommendations to guide and inform medical cannabis policy in the context of NZ. DERR1-10.2196/37697.