Impact of Medical Marijuana Legalization on Opioid Use, Chronic Opioid Use, and High-risk Opioid Use

Cannabis Use Is Associated With Fewer Filled Opioid Prescriptions After Treatment of Proximal Humerus Fractures

The purpose of this study was to use a large claims database to determine if there is a difference in opioid use after operative intervention for proximal humerus fractures in patients with known cannabis use compared with those who do not report cannabis use. The PearlDiver database was queried to find all patients who underwent proximal humerus open reduction and internal fixation. A group of patients with reported cannabis use or dependence was matched to a cohort without known cannabis use. Between the two groups, differences in the number of opioid prescriptions filled in the postoperative period (within 3 days), the morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) prescribed in total and per day, and the number of opioid prescription refills were explored. There were 66,445 potential control patients compared with 1260 potential study patients. After conducting the propensity score match, a total of 1245 patients were included in each group. The patients in the cannabis group filled fewer opioid prescriptions (P=.045) and were prescribed fewer total MMEs (P=.044) in the first 3 days postoperatively. Results of this study indicate that patients who use cannabis products may use fewer opioids after proximal humerus open reduction and internal fixation. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(3):147-151.].

Medical Marijuana Legalization in Oklahoma: Effects on Neonatal Exposure to Opiates

OBJECTIVE

 The U.S. opioid epidemic has been characterized by increases in opioid misuse, overdose deaths, and neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome. Research suggests that marijuana legalization has contributed to decreased use of opiates, although many studies had methodological weaknesses and failed to address the pregnant population. Implementation of medical cannabis laws has the potential to reduce maternal opioid use and, therefore, neonatal exposure to the drugs. This study aimed to examine the association between Oklahoma's implementation of state medical marijuana laws and the neonatal exposure to opioids.

STUDY DESIGN

 Electronic medical records at two sites (Oklahoma City and Lawton) were searched for results of cord, urine, and meconium screens to detect amphetamines, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, cocaine, ethanol, opiates, phencyclidine, and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Two study periods were compared: 19 months before Oklahoma's medical marijuana law took effect and 19 months after legalization began.

RESULTS

 A total of 16,804 babies were born alive at the two sites during the study period. The rate of positive THC tests per 1,000 liveborn infants significantly increased from 16.2 per 1,000 during the prelaw period to 22.2 per 1,000 during the postlaw period (p = 0.004). Neonatal opioid exposure incidence showed a nonsignificant decrease from 7.6 positive tests per 1,000 liveborn infants to 6.8 per 1,000 from prelaw to postlaw period (p = 0.542). The number of positive tests for THC and concomitant use of opioids doubled from the prelaw period (n = 4) to postlaw (n = 9), but there were too few cases for statistical significance. Infants at the more rural site had significantly higher rates for amphetamines, benzodiazepines, and THC, with a trend toward higher rates for opiates.

CONCLUSION

 Marijuana legalization was related to significant increases in positive test rates for THC, but no significant change/association was noted for neonatal exposure to opioids.

KEY POINTS

· Prior studies have not examined neonatal exposure to opioids following marijuana legalization.. · Oklahoma's new law led to higher neonatal marijuana exposure.. · Legalization of medical marijuana did not change Oklahoma's neonatal opioid positivity rate..

Cannabinoids in anesthesia and chronic pain: Where do we stand?

Cannabis derivatives have been conventionally employed globally for their curative and restorative properties for various ailments. However, its recreational use and consequent legal restrictions have substantially cramped its scientific research. An emerging interest regarding the profound therapeutic potential of cannabinoids has been observed among clinicians. Despite a rich cultural background, high-quality research on cannabinoids is lacking in the Indian scenario. This review readdresses the challenges on this front and brings an insight into the current status of cannabinoids and their utility in scientific exploration. Cannabinoids have a significant medicinal value in various clinical disorders. Its use so far has been based on scarce resources and corroborations, as evidence-based substantiation is limited. Through this review article, we emphasize the remarkable role enacted by cannabinoids in the treatment of various clinical disorders and an utterly significant need to formulate stringent research methodologies to promote its systematic investigation.

Medical Cannabis and Its Efficacy/Effectiveness for the Treatment of Low-Back Pain: a Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This systematic review aims to inform the current state of evidence about the efficacy and effectiveness of medical cannabis use for the treatment of LBP, specifically on pain levels and overall opioid use for LBP. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, and CINAHL. The search was limited to the past 10 years (2011-2021). Study inclusion was determined by the critical appraisal process using the Joanna Briggs Institute framework. Only English language articles were included. Participant demographics included all adult individuals with LBP who were prescribed medical cannabis for LBP and may be concurrently using opioids for their LBP. Study quality and the risk of bias were both evaluated. A narrative synthesis approach was used.

RECENT FINDINGS

A total of twelve studies were included in the synthesis: one randomized controlled trial (RCT), six observational studies (one prospective, four retrospective, and one cross-over), and five case studies. All study results, except for the RCT, indicated a decrease in LBP levels or opioid use over time after medical cannabis use. The RCT reported no statistically significant difference in LBP between cannabis and placebo groups. Low back pain (LBP) affects 568 million people worldwide. In the United States, LBP treatment represents more than half of regular opioid users. With the opioid epidemic, alternative methods, particularly medical cannabis, is now increasingly sought by practicing physicians and patients. Due to its infancy, there is minimal high-quality evidence to support medical cannabis use as a first line treatment for LBP.

Health, safety, and socioeconomic impacts of cannabis liberalization laws: An evidence and gap map

Background

Globally, cannabis laws and regulations are rapidly changing. Countries are increasingly permitting access to cannabis under various decriminalization, medicalization, and legalization laws. With strong economic, public health, and social justice incentives driving these domestic cannabis policy reforms, liberalization trends are bound to continue. However, despite a large and growing body of interdisciplinary research addressing the policy-relevant health, safety, and socioeconomic consequences of cannabis liberalization, there is a lack of robust primary and systematic research that comprehensively investigates the consequences of these reforms.

Objectives

This evidence and gap map (EGM) summarizes the empirical evidence on cannabis liberalization policies. Primary objectives were to develop a conceptual framework linking cannabis liberalization policies to relevant outcomes, descriptively summarize the empirical evidence, and identify areas of evidence concentration and gaps.

Search Methods

We comprehensively searched for eligible English-language empirical studies published across 23 academic databases and 11 gray literature sources through August 2020. Additions to the pool of potentially eligible studies from supplemental sources were made through November 2020.

Selection Criteria

The conceptual framework for this EGM draws upon a legal epidemiological perspective highlighting the causal effects of law and policy on population-level outcomes. Eligible interventions include policies that create or expand access to a legal or decriminalized supply of cannabis: comprehensive medical cannabis laws (MCLs), limited medical cannabidiol laws (CBDLs), recreational cannabis laws (RCLs), industrial hemp laws (IHLs), and decriminalization of cultivations laws (DCLs). Eligible outcomes include intermediate responses (i.e., attitudes/behaviors and markets/environments) and longer-term consequences (health, safety, and socioeconomic outcomes) of these laws.

Data Collection and Analysis

Both dual screening and dual data extraction were performed with third person deconfliction. Primary studies were appraised using the Maryland Scientific Methods Scale and systematic reviews were assessed using AMSTAR 2.

Main Results

The EGM includes 447 studies, comprising 438 primary studies and nine systematic reviews. Most research derives from the United States, with little research from other countries. By far, most cannabis liberalization research focuses on the effects of MCLs and RCLs. Studies targeting other laws-including CBDLs, IHLs, and DCLs-are relatively rare. Of the 113 distinct outcomes we documented, cannabis use was the single most frequently investigated. More than half these outcomes were addressed by three or fewer studies, highlighting substantial evidence gaps in the literature. The systematic evidence base is relatively small, comprising just seven completed reviews on cannabis use (3), opioid-related harms (3), and alcohol-related outcomes (1). Moreover, we have limited confidence in the reviews, as five were appraised as minimal quality and two as low quality.

Authors’ Conclusions

More primary and systematic research is needed to better understand the effects of cannabis liberalization laws on longer-term-and arguably more salient-health, safety, and socioeconomic outcomes. Since most research concerns MCLs and RCLs, there is a critical need for research on the societal impacts of industrial hemp production, medical CBD products, and decriminalized cannabis cultivation. Future research should also prioritize understanding the heterogeneous effects of these laws given differences in specific provisions and implementation across jurisdictions.

Medical marijuana access and prolonged opioid use among adolescents and young adults

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Laws liberalizing access to medical marijuana are associated with reduced opioid analgesic use among adults, but little is known about the impact of such policies on adolescents and young adults.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used 2005 to 2014 claims from MarketScan® Commercial database, which covers all 50 states and Washington D.C. The sample included 195,204 adolescent and young adult patients (aged 12-25) who underwent one of 13 surgical procedures.

RESULTS

Of the 195,204 patients, 4.8% had prolonged opioid use. Several factors were associated with a higher likelihood of prolonged opioid use, including being female (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-1.33), longer hospital stay (aOR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.06), greater days of index opioid supply (8-14 days: aOR, 1.39, 95% CI, 1.33-1.45; greater than 14 days: aOR, 2.42, 95% CI, 2.26-2.59), rural residence (aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.01-1.14), and cholecystectomy (aOR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.08-1.25). There was not a significant association of medical marijuana dispensary laws on prolonged opioid use (aOR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.81-1.18).

CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Medical marijuana has been suggested as a substitute for opioids, but our results focusing on adolescents and young adults provide new evidence that this particularly vulnerable population does not exhibit reductions in prolonged use of opioids after surgery when they have legal access to medical marijuana. These findings are the first to demonstrate potentially important age differences in sustained use of opioids, and point to the need for prescriber oversight and management with this vulnerable population.

An answered call for aid? Cannabinoid clinical framework for the opioid epidemic

BACKGROUND

The opioid crisis continues in full force, as physicians and caregivers are desperate for resources to help patients with opioid use and chronic pain disorders find safer and more accessible non-opioid tools.

MAIN BODY

The purpose of this article is to review the current state of the opioid epidemic; the shifting picture of cannabinoids; and the research, policy, and current events that make opioid risk reduction an urgent public health challenge. The provided table contains an evidence-based clinical framework for the utilization of cannabinoids to treat patients with chronic pain who are dependent on opioids, seeking alternatives to opioids, and tapering opioids.

CONCLUSION

Based on a comprehensive review of the literature and epidemiological evidence to date, cannabinoids stand to be one of the most interesting, safe, and accessible tools available to attenuate the devastation resulting from the misuse and abuse of opioid narcotics. Considering the urgency of the opioid epidemic and broadening of cannabinoid accessibility amidst absent prescribing guidelines, the authors recommend use of this clinical framework in the contexts of both clinical research continuity and patient care.

Effects of U.S. State Medical Cannabis Laws on Treatment of Chronic Noncancer Pain

BACKGROUND

State medical cannabis laws may lead patients with chronic noncancer pain to substitute cannabis in place of prescription opioid or clinical guideline-concordant nonopioid prescription pain medications or procedures.

OBJECTIVE

To assess effects of state medical cannabis laws on receipt of prescription opioids, nonopioid prescription pain medications, and procedures for chronic noncancer pain.

DESIGN

Using data from 12 states that implemented medical cannabis laws and 17 comparison states, augmented synthetic control analyses estimated laws' effects on receipt of chronic noncancer pain treatment, relative to predicted treatment receipt in the absence of the law.

SETTING

United States, 2010 to 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

583 820 commercially insured adults with chronic noncancer pain.

MEASUREMENTS

Proportion of patients receiving any opioid prescription, nonopioid prescription pain medication, or procedure for chronic noncancer pain; volume of each treatment type; and mean days' supply and mean morphine milligram equivalents per day of prescribed opioids, per patient in a given month.

RESULTS

In a given month during the first 3 years of law implementation, medical cannabis laws led to an average difference of 0.05 percentage points (95% CI, -0.12 to 0.21 percentage points), 0.05 percentage points (CI, -0.13 to 0.23 percentage points), and -0.17 percentage points (CI, -0.42 to 0.08 percentage points) in the proportion of patients receiving any opioid prescription, any nonopioid prescription pain medication, or any chronic pain procedure, respectively, relative to what we predict would have happened in that month had the law not been implemented.

LIMITATIONS

This study used a strong nonexperimental design but relies on untestable assumptions involving parallel counterfactual trends. Statistical power is limited by the finite number of states. Results may not generalize to noncommercially insured populations.

CONCLUSION

This study did not identify important effects of medical cannabis laws on receipt of opioid or nonopioid pain treatment among patients with chronic noncancer pain.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Multiple Sclerosis and Use of Medical Cannabis: A Retrospective Review of a Neurology Outpatient Population

BACKGROUND

Patients diagnosed as having multiple sclerosis (MS) experience a wide range of symptoms requiring pharmacologic management, and many do not achieve adequate symptom control. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of medical cannabis (MC) as part of a comprehensive treatment plan for patients with MS.

METHODS

A retrospective medical record review of 141 patients with MS receiving MC for symptom management was conducted. Data were collected for up to 4 follow-up appointments after initiation of MC. Outcomes included changes in MS symptoms, medication changes, adverse events, and changes in cognition and mobility.

RESULTS

Patients experienced extensive MS symptom improvement after initiation of MC, with alleviation of pain (72% of patients) and spasticity (48% of patients) and improvement in sleep (40% of patients) the most common. There was a significant reduction in concomitant opioid use after initiating MC as evidenced by a significant decrease in daily morphine milligram equivalents among patients prescribed opioid analgesics (P = .01). Decreases in muscle relaxant use and benzodiazepine use did not reach significance (P > .05). The most common adverse reaction to MC was fatigue (11% of patients).

CONCLUSIONS

In many patients with MS, MC was well tolerated, eased pain and spasticity, improved sleep and other symptoms, and reduced use of concomitant opioid analgesics. Prospective studies are needed to further investigate the role of MC in the treatment of patients with MS.

Medical Cannabis for Chronic Nonmalignant Pain Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cannabis has been used since ancient times for medical and recreational research. This review article will document the validity of how medical cannabis can be utilized for chronic nonmalignant pain management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current cannabis research has shown that medical cannabis is indicated for symptom management for many conditions not limited to cancer, chronic pain, headaches, migraines, and psychological disorders (anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder). Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) are active ingredients in cannabis that modulate a patient's symptoms. These compounds work to decrease nociception and symptom frequency via the endocannabinoid system. Research regarding pain management is limited within the USA as the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) classifies it as a schedule one drug. Few studies have found a limited relationship between chronic pain and medical cannabis use. A total of 77 articles were selected after a thorough screening process using PubMed and Google Scholar. This paper demonstrates that medical cannabis use provides adequate pain management. Patients suffering from chronic nonmalignant pain may benefit from medical cannabis due to its convenience and efficacy.

Do We Have Structure, Process and Outcomes to Support Cannabis as Supportive Therapy in Cancer?

Cannabis is becoming more popular and more available in the United States. It has been approved for use by multiple states for various conditions and several states now allow recreational cannabis. We explore the structure of cannabis distribution, the process of acquisition, outcomes, and the safety of cannabis in the United States.

Increase in Cannabis Use Among Adults With Rheumatic Diseases: Results From a 2014-2019 United States Observational Study

OBJECTIVE

Despite advances in treatments and outcomes among patients with rheumatic diseases, there is an unmet need in pain management. Cannabis has emerged as a potential opioid-sparing alternative, with arthritic pain as a commonly cited reason for medicinal cannabis use. However, little is known, and we set out to understand patterns of cannabis use in a US-wide rheumatic disease population.

METHODS

The study included participants in FORWARD, The National Databank for Rheumatic Diseases. Participants were asked in 2014 and 2019 about their past and current cannabis use. Demographic characteristics, patient-reported outcomes, medications, comorbidities, and diagnoses were compared between cannabis users and non-users with t-tests, chi-square tests, logistic regression, and geographic assessment.

RESULTS

Among 11,006 respondents, cannabis use increased from 6.3% in 2014 to 18.4% in 2019, with the greatest prevalence of use in states where cannabis use was legalized. Most users (74% and 62% in 2014 and 2019, respectively) reported that cannabis was effective in the relief of arthritis symptoms. Cannabis users were more likely to be taking weak opioids (odds ratio 1.2 [95% confidence interval 1.0, 1.5], P = 0.03), to have a history of smoking tobacco (odds ratio 1.7 [95% confidence interval 1.5, 2.1], P < 0.001), and had worse measures on all assessed patient-reported outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Reported cannabis use in this cohort increased significantly between 2014 and 2019. Characteristics of users suggest that those who try cannabis are feeling worse symptomatically, and their pain management needs may not be adequately addressed by other therapies. The association between cannabis, opioids, and patient-reported outcomes highlight areas for future work.

Development of a potential opioid misuse measure from administrative dispensing data and contrasting opioid misuse among individuals on long-term tramadol, long-term short-acting hydrocodone or long-term short-acting oxycodone therapy in Arkansas

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to: (1) construct and validate a composite potential opioid misuse score; and (2) compare potential opioid misuse among individuals prescribed long-term therapy on tramadol, short-acting hydrocodone or short-acting oxycodone.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using Arkansas All-Payer Claims Database (APCD; 2013-2018) linked to Arkansas Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP; 2014-2017) and state death certificate data (2013-2018). The study subjects were ambulatory, cancer-free adults with incident long-term therapy on tramadol, short-acting hydrocodone or short-acting oxycodone. The number of opioid prescribers/pharmacies, cash payment for opioid prescriptions, overlapping prescribers/pharmacies and a composite misuse score (derived from opioid prescribers/pharmacies and cash payment) were assessed in two 180 day windows as potential measures of misuse. The composite score was developed based on associations observed with opioid overdose and opioid-related injuries.

RESULTS

A total of 17,816 (tramadol), 23,660 (hydrocodone) and 4799 (oxycodone) persons were included. The composite score had modest discrimination for overdose (c-index = 0.65). In the first 180 day period, the average composite misuse scores were 1.28 (tramadol), 1.93 (hydrocodone) and 2.18 (oxycodone). Compared to long-term hydrocodone, long-term tramadol had lower misuse (IRR [95% CI]: 0.75 [0.73-0.76]), and long-term oxycodone had higher misuse (1.09 [1.07-1.11]) in adjusted analyses. Qualitatively similar associations were observed for nearly all individual component measures of misuse.

CONCLUSION

A composite measure of potential opioid misuse had modest levels of discrimination in detecting overdose. In comparison to long-term hydrocodone therapy, long-term oxycodone had higher and tramadol had lower risk of potential opioid misuse.

Assessing Health Care Providers' Knowledge of Medical Cannabis

Introduction: Many health care providers would benefit from greater knowledge and awareness of medical cannabis, even if they choose not to integrate it into their medical practice. Unfortunately, health care providers generally report low knowledge of medical cannabis and cite this lack of knowledge as a barrier to making patient recommendations. It is important to understand health care providers' medical cannabis knowledge and its correlates. However, few studies have rigorously assessed clinically relevant cannabis-related knowledge, instead typically focusing on attitudes toward cannabis and perceived knowledge. Methods: Physicians in a university-affiliated health system completed an anonymous online survey. The survey assessed participants' basic demographics and medical experience, experiences with cannabis education, beliefs about their knowledge of and competency regarding medical cannabis, and knowledge of medical cannabis in relation to the current scientific evidence. Results: The average level of medical cannabis knowledge was 58% correct, with scores ranging from 39% to 78% correct. Perceived cannabis knowledge predicted actual knowledge, and those who pursued self-initiated study or attended a lecture on medical cannabis had higher knowledge levels. Conclusion: Levels of factual knowledge about medical cannabis among physicians were moderate. Our results highlight the mismatch between physician knowledge and cannabis policy. We offer our brief, 10-min assessment as a baseline for characterizing cannabis knowledge, acknowledging that the content and interpretation may change as knowledge advances.

The Role of Cannabis, Cannabidiol and Other Cannabinoids in Chronic Pain. The Perspective of Physicians

Currently, there is a renewed interest in treatments with medical cannabis and cannabinoids. Based on an increasing number of publications over the last decades that permitted new insights into mechanisms, efficacy and safety of cannabinoids, the use of cannabinergic medications is authorised in an increasing number of European and non-European countries. The alleviation of chronic, painful conditions is, since thousands of years, one of the primary reasons for the use of cannabis. Depending on the country, a wide range of medicinal cannabis preparations are available:ranging from defined cultivars of medical cannabis, mainly varying in their THC:CBD ratio, that are inhaled or taken as whole plant extracts,to highly purified single cannabinoids, such as delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD),or mixtures of two enriched extracts, standardised to a 1:1 ratio of THC:CBD (nabiximols). Although conflicting opinions continue to exist, the majority of reviews in the past concluded that medical cannabis and cannabinoids play a significant role in the management of pain. Surprisingly, systematic studies to date do not support an "entourage effect" of the other plant constituents of cannabis (mainly terpenoids) in treatment of chronic pain. An emerging cannabinoid is CBD which is the only cannabinergic medication available at present that does not cause the typical "cannabis high"; it is not a "controlled substance". However, despite years of research, there is either no study or no well-conducted, head-to-head, comparison available between different cannabis cultivars, between pure cannabinoids, and between pure cannabinoids and extracts. It remains unanswered which is the optimal treatment approach.

Medical marijuana for inflammatory bowel disease: the highs and lows

Increased interest in cannabis as a potential treatment and/or adjuvant therapy for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been driven by patients with refractory disease seeking relief as well those who desire alternatives to conventional therapies. Available data have shown a potential role of cannabis as a supportive medication, particularly in pain reduction; however, it remains unknown whether cannabis has any impact on the underlying inflammatory process of IBD. The purpose of this review article is to summarize the available literature concerning the use of cannabis for the treatment of IBD and highlight potential areas for future study.

Association of medical cannabis licensure with prescription opioid receipt: A population-based, individual-level retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The endocannabinoid system has been implicated in physiological processes fundamental to pain, giving plausibility to the hypothesis that cannabis may be used as a substitute or complement to prescription opioids in the management of chronic pain. We examined the association of medical cannabis licensure with likelihood of prescription opioid receipt using administrative records.

METHODS

This study linked registry information for medical cannabis licensure with records from the prescription drug monitoring program from April 1, 2016 to March 31, 2019 to create a population-based, retrospective cohort in Rhode Island. We examined within-person changes in receipt of any opioid prescription and receipt of an opioid prescription with a morphine equivalent dose of 50 mg or more, and of 90 mg or more.

RESULTS

The sample included 5,296 participants with medical cannabis license. Medical cannabis licensure was not associated with the odds of filling any opioid prescription (OR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.94-0.1.05) or the odds of filling a prescription with a morphine equivalent dose of 50 mg or more (OR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.84-1.04) and 90 mg or more (OR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.86-1.15).

CONCLUSION

Medical cannabis licensure was not associated with subsequent cessation and reduction in prescription opioid use. Re-scheduling of cannabis will allow for the conduct of randomized controlled trials to determine the efficacy of medical cannabis as an alternative to prescription opioid use or a complement to the use of lower doses of prescription opioids in patients with chronic pain.

Societal Costs and Outcomes of Medical and Recreational Marijuana Policies in the United States: A Systematic Review

Significant support exists in the United States for legalization of marijuana/cannabis. As of 2021, 36 states and four territories approved the legalization of medical cannabis via medical marijuana laws (MMLs), and 15 states and District of Columbia (DC) have adopted recreational marijuana laws (RMLs). We performed structured and systematic searches of articles published from 2010 through September 2021. We assess the literature pertaining to adolescent marijuana use; opioid use and opioid-related outcomes; alcohol use; tobacco use; illicit and other drug use; marijuana growing and cultivation; employment, earnings, and other workplace outcomes; academic achievement and performance; criminal activity; perceived harmfulness; traffic and road safety; and suicide and sexual activity. Overall, 113 articles satisfied our inclusion criteria. Except for opioids, studies on use of other substances (illicit drugs, tobacco, and alcohol) were inconclusive. MMLs and RMLs do not generate negative outcomes in the labor market, lead to greater criminal activity, or reduce traffic and road safety.

Association between fatal opioid overdose and state medical cannabis laws in US national survey data, 2000-2011

AIMS

Most information on the relationship between medical cannabis laws (MCL) and the risk for opioid overdose fatality has been based on studies with ecological designs. To contribute additional information, we used a novel case-control design and individual-level data from national surveys to assess whether state medical cannabis laws were associated with reduced risk of fatal opioid overdose between 2000-2011.

METHODS

Data from participants surveyed in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) between 1986-2011 were included. For those sampled between 1986-2009, detailed mortality follow-up data were available from the National Death Index up to 12/31/2011. Opioid overdose decedents (n = 791) were classified as cases. Between 2000-2011, all cases arising in a given year were matched to adult controls who were surveyed the same year and eligible for mortality follow-up (n = 723,920). The distribution of exposure to state MCL was contrasted between cases and controls, providing an approximation of the rate ratio of fatal opioid overdose associated with MCLs. Due to a NHIS sample redesign, we stratified analysis using timeframes before and after 2005.

RESULTS

Overall, compared to controls, cases were more likely to be male, middle-aged, non-Hispanic White, separated/divorced; less educated, and have a family income below the poverty threshold. No overall association between state MCLs and the rate of opioid overdose was observed between 2000-2005 (aOR = 1.22, 95% CI: 0.83-1.79) or between 2006-2011 (aOR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.60-1.25). No significant difference between sampling timeframes was observed (ratio of aOR's = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.49-1.01).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no overall protective relationship between state MCLs and opioid overdose. Future research with more recent mortality data and more refined cannabis policy classifications would be useful. The importance of the study is two-fold. First, the findings provide an additional source of information countering claims of a protective effect of MCLs on opioid overdoses, suggesting that other solutions to the opioid overdose crisis are needed. Second, the study offers a potentially useful design to answer important population-level public health questions.

Chronic Pain Clinical and Prescriptive Practices in the Cannabis Era

BACKGROUND

To explore how health care providers in the United States are adapting clinical recommendations and prescriptive practices in response to patient use of medical cannabis (MC) for chronic pain symptoms.

DESIGN

Literature searches queried MeSH/Subject terms "chronic pain," "clinician," "cannabis," and Boolean text words "practice" and "analgesics" in EBSCOHost, EMBASE, PubMed, and Scopus, published 2010-2021 in the United States. Twenty-one primary, peer-reviewed studies met criteria.

METHODS

Studies are synthesized under major headings: recommending MC for chronic pain; MC and prescription opioids; and harm reduction of MC.

RESULTS

MC is increasingly utilized by patients for chronic pain symptoms. Clinical recommendations for or against MC are influenced by scopes of practice, state or federal laws, institutional policies, education, potential patient harm (or indirect harm of others), and perceived confidence. Epidemiologic and cohort studies show downward trajectories of opioid prescribing and consumption in states with legal cannabis. However, clinicians' recommendations and prescription practices are nonuniform. Impacts of cannabis laws are clear between nongovernmental and governmental institutions. Strategies addressing MC and opioid use include frequent visits, and, to reduce harm, suggesting alternative therapies and treating substance use disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

MC use for chronic pain is increasing with cannabis legalization. Provider practices are heterogenous, demonstrating a balance of treating chronic pain using available evidence, while being aware of potential harms associated with MC and opioids.

Outcomes of Infrainguinal Bypass in Patients with Cannabis vs Opioid Use Disorder Outcomes of IIB in Patients with CUD vs OUD

OBJECTIVE

Marijuana and opioids are commonly used illicit drugs in the United States and their use continues to rise. Cannabis use disorder (CUD) and Opioid use disorder (OUD) are associated with adverse effects on public health and postoperative outcomes. However, their impact on vascular surgery, specifically infrainguinal bypass repair (IIB). is not well described in the literature. Therefore, our study aimed to assess perioperative outcomes in patients with CUD and OUD who underwent IIB.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the National Inpatient Sample database for the years 2005 to 2018 was performed. Using the International Classification of Diseases Clinical Modification, Ninth and Tenth revisions, patients who were diagnosed with peripheral artery disease and underwent IIB repair.were identified. Our primary outcome was the comparison of rates of in-hospital complications between the groups, and the secondary outcomes included analysis of total hospital charges and length of stay. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) CUD and OUD patients to their control groups without the disease was conducted using the nearest-neighbor method. The matching was based on select patient demographics and comorbidities included in our analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 190,794 patients were identified: 972 patients with CUD and 682 patients with OUD. In the matched cohorts, patients with a diagnosis of CUD had a higher incidence of in-hospital cardiac complications (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR], 1.76; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 0.99 - 3.12) and acute kidney injury (AKI) (aOR, 1.51; CI, 1.09 - 2.08). Additionally, total hospital charges and mean length of stay were higher in the CUD group (P <.001). Those with OUD had a higher incidence of postoperative respiratory complications (aOR, 1.92; CI, 1.23 - 2.99), sepsis (aOR, 2.39; CI, 1.32 - 4.34), infection (aOR, 3.55; CI, 1.16 - 10.84), AKI (aOR, 2.11; CI,1.47-3.04), major amputations (aOR, 1.69; CI, 1.07 - 2.69), along with higher total charges and mean length of stay (P <.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both CUD and OUD have increased incidence of postoperative complications following IIB. The OUD group had generally worse outcomes compared to patients with CUD. Both were associated with a substantial increase in total hospital charges and length of hospital stay. A further prospective study is warranted to provide better insight on the effects of substance use disorders on the procedure's short- and long-term outcomes.

Impact of Marijuana Legalization on Opioid Utilization in Patients Diagnosed with Pain

BACKGROUND

Given efforts to reduce opioid use, and because marijuana potentially offers a lower-risk alternative for treating chronic pain, there is interest in understanding the public health impact of marijuana legalization on opioid-related outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

Assess the impact of recreational and medical marijuana legalization on opioid utilization among patients receiving pharmacotherapy for pain.

DESIGN

Retrospective claims-based study of commercially insured patients continuously eligible for pharmacy and medical benefits from July 8, 2014 to June 30, 2017. Index pain prescription period was defined between January 8, 2015 and June 30, 2015, and longer-term opioid use examined during 2-year follow-up. Marijuana state policy on July 1, 2015, was assigned: none; medical only; or medical and recreational.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 18-62 without cancer diagnosis.

MAIN MEASURES

Patient receiving (1) opioid at index; (2) > 7 days' supply of index opioid; (3) opioid during follow-up; and (4) ≥ 90 days' opioid supply during follow-up. Multivariable regression assessed associations between opioid utilization and state marijuana policy, adjusting for age, gender, overall disease burden, mental health treatment, concomitant use of benzodiazepine or muscle relaxant, and previous pain prescription.

KEY RESULTS

Of 141,711 patients, 80,955 (57.1%) resided in states with no policy; 56,494 (39.9%) with medical-only; and 4262 (3.0%) with medical and recreational. Patients in states with both policies were more likely to receive an index opioid (aOR = 1.72, 95% CI = 1.61-1.85; aOR = 1.90, 95% CI = 1.77-2.03; P < 0.001) but less likely to receive > 7 days' index supply (aOR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.77-0.91; aOR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.70-0.83; P < 0.001) than patients in states with no policy or medical-only, respectively. Those in states with both policies were more likely to receive a follow-up opioid (aOR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.71-2.05; aOR = 2.20, 95% CI = 2.01-2.42; P < 0.001) than those in states with no policy or medical-only, respectively, and more likely to receive ≥ 90 cumulative follow-up opioid days' supply (aOR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.07-1.29; P < 0.001) than those in states with no policy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis does not support the supposition that access to marijuana lowers use of chronic opioids for pain.

Health Outcomes among Adults Initiating Medical Cannabis for Chronic Pain: A 3-month Prospective Study Incorporating Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA)

In response to the need of more rigorous data on medical cannabis and chronic pain, we conducted a 3-month prospective study incorporating ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to examine the effects of medical cannabis on pain, anxiety/depression, sleep, and quality of life. Data were collected from 46 adults (Mean age=55.7±11.9, 52.2% male) newly initiating medical cannabis treatment for chronic pain. Participants completed a baseline survey, EMA for approximately 1 week pre- and up to 3 weeks post- medical cannabis treatment, and a 3-month follow-up survey. The self-reported EMA data (2535 random and 705 daily assessments) indicated significant reductions in momentary pain intensity (b = -16.5, p < .001, 16.5 points reduction on 0-100 visual analog) and anxiety (b = -0.89, p < .05), and significant increase in daily sleep duration (b = 0.34, p < .01) and sleep quality (b = 0.32, p <.001) after participants initiated medical cannabis for a few weeks. At 3 months, self-reported survey data showed significantly lower levels of worst pain (t = -2.38, p < .05), pain interference (t = -3.82, p < .05), and depression (t = -3.43, p < .01), as well as increased sleep duration (t = 3.95, p < .001), sleep quality (t = -3.04, p < .01), and quality of life (t = 4.48, p < .001) compared to baseline. In our sample of primarily middle-aged and older adults with chronic pain, medical cannabis was associated with reduced pain intensity/inference, lower anxiety/depression, and improved sleep and quality of life.

The Endocannabinoid System: A Potential Target for the Treatment of Various Diseases

The Endocannabinoid System (ECS) is primarily responsible for maintaining homeostasis, a balance in internal environment (temperature, mood, and immune system) and energy input and output in living, biological systems. In addition to regulating physiological processes, the ECS directly influences anxiety, feeding behaviour/appetite, emotional behaviour, depression, nervous functions, neurogenesis, neuroprotection, reward, cognition, learning, memory, pain sensation, fertility, pregnancy, and pre-and post-natal development. The ECS is also involved in several pathophysiological diseases such as cancer, cardiovascular diseases, and neurodegenerative diseases. In recent years, genetic and pharmacological manipulation of the ECS has gained significant interest in medicine, research, and drug discovery and development. The distribution of the components of the ECS system throughout the body, and the physiological/pathophysiological role of the ECS-signalling pathways in many diseases, all offer promising opportunities for the development of novel cannabinergic, cannabimimetic, and cannabinoid-based therapeutic drugs that genetically or pharmacologically modulate the ECS via inhibition of metabolic pathways and/or agonism or antagonism of the receptors of the ECS. This modulation results in the differential expression/activity of the components of the ECS that may be beneficial in the treatment of a number of diseases. This manuscript in-depth review will investigate the potential of the ECS in the treatment of various diseases, and to put forth the suggestion that many of these secondary metabolites of Cannabis sativa L. (hereafter referred to as "C. sativa L." or "medical cannabis"), may also have potential as lead compounds in the development of cannabinoid-based pharmaceuticals for a variety of diseases.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2019

This paper is the forty-second consecutive installment of the annual anthological review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, summarizing articles published during 2019 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides and receptors as well as effects of opioid/opiate agonists and antagonists. The review is subdivided into the following specific topics: molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors (1), the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia in animals (2) and humans (3), opioid-sensitive and opioid-insensitive effects of nonopioid analgesics (4), opioid peptide and receptor involvement in tolerance and dependence (5), stress and social status (6), learning and memory (7), eating and drinking (8), drug abuse and alcohol (9), sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (10), mental illness and mood (11), seizures and neurologic disorders (12), electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (13), general activity and locomotion (14), gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (15), cardiovascular responses (16), respiration and thermoregulation (17), and immunological responses (18).

Cannabidiol as a Treatment for Chronic Pain: A Survey of Patients' Perspectives and Attitudes

INTRODUCTION

Cannabis products have become easily available and accessible after decriminalization of cannabis for recreational and medicinal use in many states. Cannabidiol (CBD) has been of increasing interest to patients and is being used to self-medicate a variety of ailments. However, very limited information is available to patients and providers to form an educated opinion regarding its indicated use to treat the many conditions this substance has been implied to be helpful for. The aim of this survey was to learn about participants' attitudes and views towards cannabis-based medicine (CBM) with a focus on perception of "CBD" and its potential role for pain management.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We recruited survey participants from seven pain management clinics in Southern California to learn about their knowledge, beliefs, and personal experience with CBD products. After Institutional Review Board (IRB) review, an internet survey platform was utilized to administer the survey online.

RESULTS

A total of 253 participants answered the survey. Participants were 45.4 ± 13.8 (Mean ± SD) years of age, the majority identified as white (56.1%), had an annual household income of less than $20,000, and were primarily insured by Medicare (22.5%) or Medicaid (43.9%). Among participants, 62.0% reported trying a CBD product [including products containing delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)]. The majority responded that these products have helped their pain (59.0%) and allowed them to reduce their pain medications (67.6%), including opioids (53.7%). They reported believing that CBD was a good treatment option (71.1%), not harmful (74.9%), and not addictive (65.3%). About half of participants (51.9%) report that they would be more comfortable with their physician prescribing CBD products. The overall attitude and experience of participants regarding CBD is reported as positive, while 91.9% of people expressed a desire to learn more about it.

SUMMARY

In summary, most participants expressed a positive attitude about CBD products as a treatment option, reported positive outcomes when used for multiple different conditions, and would prefer to obtain information about and prescription for CBD from their physicians.

Demand curve analysis of marijuana use among persons living with HIV

BACKGROUND

Despite medicalization and legalization of marijuana use, factors influencing demand for marijuana among persons living with HIV (PLWH) are incompletely understood. This knowledge gap undermines effective clinical management and policies. This study used demand curve simulation methods to address these issues.

METHODS

Marijuana-using PLWH (N = 119) completed experimental tasks to simulate amount of marijuana purchasing/use across different costs (money or time), and likelihood of reselling marijuana or marijuana therapeutic-use registration card in relation to profits. Additional simulations assessed purchasing of marijuana relative to other drug and non-drug goods.

RESULTS

Simulated marijuana use decreased as money and time costs increased. Consumption was greater for participants with more severe Cannabis Use Disorder (CUD) and anxiety, intermediate pain levels, and past 90-day opioid use. Whereas few participants chose to sell their registration card, marijuana resale (diversion) steeply increased with profit. Likelihood of seeking marijuana therapeutic-use certification decreased in relation to registration card money cost, having to visit more physicians to get a signature, and delay to receiving the card, and increased with duration of certification. Participants who reported recent opioid use were more likely to seek certification. Consumption of several commodities assessed was independent of marijuana.

CONCLUSIONS

Simulated marijuana use was related to participants' clinical profile (CUD, anxiety and pain symptoms, recent opioid use), and unrelated to purchasing other goods. Likelihood of seeking marijuana therapeutic-use registration was affected by several types of costs and recent opioid use. Participants were unlikely to divert registration cards. We discuss clinical and policy implications of these findings.

Variations in Long-term Opioid Therapy Definitions: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies Using Routinely Collected Data (2000-2019)

Routinely collected data have been increasingly used to assess long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) patterns, with very little guidance on how to measure LTOT from these data sources. We conducted a systematic review of studies published between January 2000 and July 2019 to catalogue LTOT definitions, the rationale for definitions and LTOT rates in observational research using routinely collected data in nonsurgical settings. We screened 4056 abstracts, 210 full-text manuscripts and included 128 studies, mostly from the United States (81%) and published between 2015 and 2019 (69%). We identified 78 definitions of LTOT, commonly operationalised as 90 days of use within a year (23%). Studies often used multiple criteria to derive definitions (60%), mostly based on measures of duration, such as supply days/days of use (66%), episode length (21%) or prescription fills within specified time periods (12%). Definitions were based on previous publications (63%), clinical judgment (16%) or empirical data (3%); 10% of studies applied more than one definition. LTOT definition was not provided with enough details for replication in 14 studies and 38 studies did not specify the opioids evaluated. Rates of LTOT within study populations ranged from 0.2% to 57% according to study design and definition used. We observed a substantial rise in the last 5 years in studies evaluating LTOT with large variability in the definitions used and poor reporting of the rationale and implementation of definitions. This variation impacts on research reproducibility, comparability of findings and the development of strategies aiming to curb therapy that is not guideline-recommended.

Factors associated with health-related cannabis use intentions among a community sample of people who inject drugs in Los Angeles and San Francisco, CA 2016 to 2018

OBJECTIVE

Cannabis motivations have been studied extensively among patients of medicinal cannabis dispensaries, but less is known about motivations in community samples of opioid-using people who inject drugs. Our objective is to describe cannabis use motivations associated with self-treatment of physical pain, emotional issues, and as an opioid substitute.

METHODS

Data come from 6-month follow-up interviews with people who inject drugs who participated in a study on the efficacy of an injection initiation prevention intervention in Los Angeles and San Francisco, California from 2016-18. The analytic sample consists of 387 people who inject drugs who reported past-month cannabis use. We developed multivariable logistic regression models by reported cannabis use motivations: physical pain relief, emotional problems, and opioid substitute.

RESULTS

The most common cannabis use motivations reported by people who inject drugs was to "get high," relieve physical pain and emotional problems, and reduce opioid use. In separate multivariate models, using cannabis for physical pain relief was associated with higher odds of using cannabis as a substitute for opioids; cannabis for emotional problems was associated with being diagnosed with depression; and cannabis as a substitute for opioids was associated with non-prescribed, non-injection methadone use.

CONCLUSION

People who inject drugs reported using cannabis for health-related motivations. This motivation aligns with health needs and suggests the acceptability of cannabis use for health reasons in this population. Studies to determine the medical effectiveness of cannabis products for these common health and mental health needs among people who inject drugs are needed.

Protocol: mixed-methods study of how implementation of US state medical cannabis laws affects treatment of chronic non-cancer pain and adverse opioid outcomes

BACKGROUND

Thirty-three US states and Washington, D.C., have enacted medical cannabis laws allowing patients with chronic non-cancer pain to use cannabis, when recommended by a physician, to manage their condition. However, clinical guidelines do not recommend cannabis for treatment of chronic non-cancer pain due to limited and mixed evidence of effectiveness. How state medical cannabis laws affect delivery of evidence-based treatment for chronic non-cancer pain is unclear. These laws could lead to substitution of cannabis in place of clinical guideline-discordant opioid prescribing, reducing risk of opioid use disorder and overdose. Conversely, state medical cannabis laws could lead to substitution of cannabis in place of guideline-concordant treatments such as topical analgesics or physical therapy. This protocol describes a mixed-methods study examining the implementation and effects of state medical cannabis laws on treatment of chronic non-cancer pain. A key contribution of the study is the examination of how variation in state medical cannabis laws' policy implementation rules affects receipt of chronic non-cancer pain treatments.

METHODS

The study uses a concurrent-embedded design. The primary quantitative component of the study employs a difference-in-differences design using a policy trial emulation approach. Quantitative analyses will evaluate state medical cannabis laws' effects on treatment for chronic non-cancer pain as well as on receipt of treatment for opioid use disorder, opioid overdose, cannabis use disorder, and cannabis poisoning among people with chronic non-cancer pain. Secondary qualitative and survey methods will be used to characterize implementation of state medical cannabis laws through interviews with state leaders and representative surveys of physicians who treat, and patients who experience, chronic non-cancer pain in states with medical cannabis laws.

DISCUSSION

This study will examine the effects of medical cannabis laws on patients' receipt of guideline-concordant non-opioid, non-cannabis treatments for chronic non-cancer pain and generate new evidence on the effects of state medical cannabis laws on adverse opioid outcomes. Results will inform the dynamic policy environment in which numerous states consider, enact, and/or amend medical cannabis laws each year.

Chronic Opioid Therapy: A Scoping Literature Review on Evolving Clinical and Scientific Definitions

The management of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) with chronic opioid therapy (COT) is controversial. There is a lack of consensus on how COT is defined resulting in unclear clinical guidance. This scoping review identifies and evaluates evolving COT definitions throughout the published clinical and scientific literature. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. A total of 227 studies were identified from 8,866 studies published between January 2000 and July 2019. COT definitions were classified by pain population of application and specific dosage/duration definition parameters, with results reported according to PRISMA-ScR. Approximately half of studies defined COT as "days' supply duration >90 days" and 9.3% defined as ">120 days' supply," with other days' supply cut-off points (>30, >60, or >70) each appearing in <5% of total studies. COT was defined by number of prescriptions in 63 studies, with 16.3% and 11.0% using number of initiations or refills, respectively. Few studies explicitly distinguished acute treatment and COT. Episode duration/dosage criteria was used in 90 studies, with 7.5% by Morphine Milligram Equivalents + days' supply and 32.2% by other "episode" combination definitions. COT definitions were applied in musculoskeletal CNCP (60.8%) most often, and typically in adults aged 18 to 64 (69.6%). The usage of ">90 days' supply" COT definitions increased from 3.2 publications/year before 2016 to 20.7 publications/year after 2016. An increasing proportion of studies define COT as ">90 days' supply." The most recent literature trends toward shorter duration criteria, suggesting that contemporary COT definitions are increasingly conservative. PERSPECTIVE: This study summarized the most common, current definition criteria for chronic opioid therapy (COT) and recommends adoption of consistent definition criteria to be utilized in practice and research. The most recent literature trends toward shorter duration criteria overall, suggesting that COT definition criteria are increasingly stringent.

Impact evaluations of drug decriminalisation and legal regulation on drug use, health and social harms: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To review the metrics and findings of studies evaluating effects of drug decriminalisation or legal regulation on drug availability, use or related health and social harms globally.

DESIGN

Systematic review with narrative synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science and six additional databases for publications from 1 January 1970 through 4 October 2018.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Peer-reviewed articles or published abstracts in any language with quantitative data on drug availability, use or related health and social harms collected before and after implementation of de jure drug decriminalisation or legal regulation.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts and articles for inclusion. Extraction and quality appraisal (modified Downs and Black checklist) were performed by one reviewer and checked by a second, with discrepancies resolved by a third. We coded study-level outcome measures into metric groupings and categorised the estimated direction of association between the legal change and outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

We screened 4860 titles and 221 full-texts and included 114 articles. Most (n=104, 91.2%) were from the USA, evaluated cannabis reform (n=109, 95.6%) and focussed on legal regulation (n=96, 84.2%). 224 study outcome measures were categorised into 32 metrics, most commonly prevalence (39.5% of studies), frequency (14.0%) or perceived harmfulness (10.5%) of use of the decriminalised or regulated drug; or use of tobacco, alcohol or other drugs (12.3%). Across all substance use metrics, legal reform was most often not associated with changes in use.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies evaluating drug decriminalisation and legal regulation are concentrated in the USA and on cannabis legalisation. Despite the range of outcomes potentially impacted by drug law reform, extant research is narrowly focussed, with a particular emphasis on the prevalence of use. Metrics in drug law reform evaluations require improved alignment with relevant health and social outcomes.

A Rapid Review of the Impact of Systems-Level Policies and Interventions on Population-Level Outcomes Related to the Opioid Epidemic, United States and Canada, 2014-2018

OBJECTIVES

In the United States, rising rates of overdose deaths and recent outbreaks of hepatitis C virus and HIV infection are associated with injection drug use. We updated a 2014 review of systems-level opioid policy interventions by focusing on evidence published during 2014-2018 and new and expanded opioid policies.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE database, consistent with the 2014 review. We included articles that provided original empirical evidence on the effects of systems-level interventions on opioid use, overdose, or death; were from the United States or Canada; had a clear comparison group; and were published from January 1, 2014, through July 19, 2018. Two raters screened articles and extracted full-text data for qualitative synthesis of consistent or contradictory findings across studies. Given the rapidly evolving field, the review was supplemented with a search of additional articles through November 17, 2019, to assess consistency of more recent findings.

RESULTS

The keyword search yielded 535 studies, 66 of which met inclusion criteria. The most studied interventions were prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) (59.1%), and the least studied interventions were clinical guideline changes (7.6%). The most common outcome was opioid use (77.3%). Few articles evaluated combination interventions (18.2%). Study findings included the following: PDMP effectiveness depends on policy design, with robust PDMPs needed for impact; health insurer and pharmacy benefit management strategies, pill-mill laws, pain clinic regulations, and patient/health care provider educational interventions reduced inappropriate prescribing; and marijuana laws led to a decrease in adverse opioid-related outcomes. Naloxone distribution programs were understudied, and evidence of their effectiveness was mixed. In the evidence published after our search's 4-year window, findings on opioid guidelines and education were consistent and findings for other policies differed.

CONCLUSIONS

Although robust PDMPs and marijuana laws are promising, they do not target all outcomes, and multipronged interventions are needed. Future research should address marijuana laws, harm-reduction interventions, health insurer policies, patient/health care provider education, and the effects of simultaneous interventions on opioid-related outcomes.

Development and Performance of a Web-Based Tool to Adjust Urine Toxicology Testing Frequency: Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Several pain management guidelines recommend regular urine drug testing (UDT) in patients who are being treated with chronic opioid analgesic therapy (COAT) to monitor compliance and improve safety. Guidelines also recommend more frequent testing in patients who are at high risk of adverse events related to COAT; however, there is no consensus on how to identify high-risk patients or on the testing frequency that should be used. Using previously described clinical risk factors for UDT results that are inconsistent with the prescribed COAT, we developed a web-based tool to adjust drug testing frequency in patients treated with COAT.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate a risk stratification tool, the UDT Randomizer, to adjust UDT frequency in patients treated with COAT.

METHODS

Patients were stratified using an algorithm based on readily available clinical risk factors into categories of presumed low, moderate, high, and high+ risk of presenting with UDT results inconsistent with the prescribed COAT. The algorithm was integrated in a website to facilitate adoption across practice sites. To test the performance of this algorithm, we performed a retrospective analysis of patients treated with COAT between June 2016 and June 2017. The primary outcome was compliance with the prescribed COAT as defined by UDT results consistent with the prescribed COAT.

RESULTS

979 drug tests (867 UDT, 88.6%; 112 oral fluid testing, 11.4%) were performed in 320 patients. An inconsistent drug test result was registered in 76/979 tests (7.8%). The incidences of inconsistent test results across the risk tool categories were 7/160 (4.4%) in the low risk category, 32/349 (9.2%) in the moderate risk category, 28/338 (8.3%) in the high risk category, and 9/132 (6.8%) in the high+ risk category. Generalized estimating equation analysis demonstrated that the moderate risk (odds ratio (OR) 2.1, 95% CI 0.9-5.0; P=.10), high risk (OR 2.0, 95% CI 0.8-5.0; P=.14), and high risk+ (OR 2.0, 95% CI 0.7-5.6; P=.20) categories were associated with a nonsignificantly increased risk of inconsistency vs the low risk category.

CONCLUSIONS

The developed tool stratified patients during individual visits into risk categories of presenting with drug testing results inconsistent with the prescribed COAT; the higher risk categories showed nonsignificantly higher risk compared to the low risk category. Further development of the tool with additional risk factors in a larger cohort may further clarify and enhance its performance.

Cost-Effectiveness of Intranasal Naloxone Distribution to High-Risk Prescription Opioid Users

OBJECTIVES

To determine the cost-effectiveness of pharmacy-based intranasal naloxone distribution to high-risk prescription opioid (RxO) users.

METHODS

We developed a Markov model with an attached tree for pharmacy-based naloxone distribution to high-risk RxO users using 2 approaches: one-time and biannual follow-up distribution. The Markov structure had 6 health states: high-risk RxO use, low-risk RxO use, no RxO use, illicit opioid use, no illicit opioid use, and death. The tree modeled the probability of an overdose happening, the overdose being witnessed, naloxone being available, and the overdose resulting in death. High-risk RxO users were defined as individuals with prescription opioid doses greater than or equal to 90 morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per day. We used a monthly cycle length, lifetime horizon, and US healthcare perspective. Costs (2018) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were discounted 3% annually. Microsimulation was performed with 100 000 individual trials. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

One-time distribution of naloxone prevented 14 additional overdose deaths per 100 000 persons, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $56 699 per QALY. Biannual follow-up distribution led to 107 additional lives being saved with an ICER of $84 799 per QALY compared with one-time distribution. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that a biannual follow-up approach would be cost-effective 50% of the time at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100 000 per QALY. Naloxone effectiveness and proportion of overdoses witnessed were the 2 most influential parameters for biannual distribution.

CONCLUSION

Both one-time and biannual follow-up naloxone distribution in community pharmacies would modestly reduce opioid overdose deaths and be cost-effective at a WTP of $100 000 per QALY.

Trends in college students' alcohol, nicotine, prescription opioid and other drug use after recreational marijuana legalization: 2008-2018

BACKGROUND

Young adult college students may be particularly sensitive to recreational marijuana legalization (RML). Although evidence indicates the prevalence of marijuana use among college students increased after states instituted RML, there have been few national studies investigating changes in college students' other substance use post-RML.

METHOD

The cross-sectional National College Health Assessment-II survey was administered twice yearly from 2008 to 2018 at four-year colleges and universities. Participants were 18-26 year old undergraduates attending college in states that did (n = 243,160) or did not (n = 624,342) implement RML by 2018. Outcome variables were self-reported nicotine use, binge drinking, illicit drug use, and misuse of prescription stimulants, sedatives, and opioids. Other variables included individual and contextual covariates, and institution-reported institutional and community covariates. Publicly available information was used to code state RML status at each survey administration.

RESULTS

Accounting for state differences and time trends, RML was associated with decreased binge drinking prevalence among college students age 21 and older [OR (95% CI) = 0.91 (0.87 - 0.95), p < .0001] and increased sedative misuse among minors [OR (95% CI) = 1.20 (1.09 - 1.32), p = .0003]. RML did not disrupt secular trends in other substance use.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of related research showing national increases in college students' marijuana use prevalence and relative increases following state RML, we observed decreases in binge drinking and increases in sedative use that both depended on age. Findings support some specificity in RML-related changes in substance use trends and the importance of individual factors.

Early evidence of the impact of cannabis legalization on cannabis use, cannabis use disorder, and the use of other substances: Findings from state policy evaluations

Background: The past decade has seen unprecedented shifts in the cannabis policy environment, and the public health impacts of these changes will hinge on how they affect patterns of cannabis use and the use and harms associated with other substances.Objectives: To review existing research on how state cannabis policy impacts substance use, emphasizing studies using methods for causal inference and highlighting gaps in our understanding of policy impacts on evolving cannabis markets.Methods: Narrative review of quasi-experimental studies for how medical cannabis laws (MCLs) and recreational cannabis laws (RCLs) affect cannabis use and use disorders, as well as the use of or harms from alcohol, opioids, and tobacco.Results: Research suggests MCLs increase adult but not adolescent cannabis use, and provisions of the laws associated with less regulated supply may increase adult cannabis use disorders. These laws may reduce some opioid-related harms, while their impacts on alcohol and tobacco use remain uncertain. Research on RCLs is just emerging, but findings suggest little impact on the prevalence of adolescent cannabis use, potential increases in college student use, and unknown effects on other substance use.Conclusions: Research on how MCLs influence cannabis use has advanced our understanding of the importance of heterogeneity in policies, populations, and market dynamics, but studies of how MCLs relate to other substance use often ignore these factors. Understanding effects of cannabis laws requires greater attention to differences in short- versus long-term effects of the laws, nuances of policies and patterns of consumption, and careful consideration of appropriate control groups.