The model of care at a leading medical cannabis clinic in Canada

'The wild west of medicine': A qualitative investigation of the factors influencing Australian health-care practitioners' delivery of medicinal cannabis

INTRODUCTION

Strong patient interest in the use of medicinal cannabis to treat various clinical indications has sparked global legislative changes. Practitioners are vital in implementing regulatory changes and facilitating patient access to medicinal cannabis, however, little is currently known about the factors influencing practitioners' uptake. Recent rapid increases in practitioner applications to prescribe medicinal cannabis in Australia provides a unique backdrop to examine the current factors influencing prescribing behaviours. This qualitative study examined Australian practitioners' perspectives on prescribing medicinal cannabis to provide a comprehensive exploration of the potential factors influencing uptake in clinical practice.

METHODS

Seventeen semi-structured interviews were conducted with Australian health-care practitioners. Transcripts were analysed using the Framework approach to thematic analysis and cross-mapped to appropriate domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework.

RESULTS

We identified four themes related to the barriers and facilitators to prescribing medicinal cannabis: (i) clinical capabilities needed to prescribe; (ii) prescribing an unapproved therapeutic good; (iii) negative attitudes towards prescribers in the medical community; and (iv) divergent beliefs about clinical utility.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Practitioners face multiple pervasive barriers to prescribing medicinal cannabis. Beliefs about clinical utility appear to be highly influential in shaping prescribing behaviours. Moreover, our findings suggest that a medicinal cannabis 'specialisation' has emerged within the Australian medical community. Findings demonstrate that a range of complex and multifaceted factors influence practitioners' medicinal cannabis prescribing behaviours. We highlight several considerations for policy and practice to support safe and appropriate patient access to medicinal cannabis in this emerging area of clinical practice.

Views on and experiences with medicinal cannabis among Canadian veterans who live with pain: A qualitative study

Background

During fiscal year 2021-2022, Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) reimbursed 18,388 veterans for medicinal cannabis at a cost of $153 million. Yet, it is not known whether the reimbursement program is producing a net benefit for veterans.

Aims

This study investigated the views and experiences Canadian that veterans who live with pain have about medicinal cannabis use, including its use for the management of chronic pain, poor sleep, and emotional distress.

Methods

Twelve Canadian veterans who live with pain-eight men, four women; split across four focus groups-were recruited to participate in a semistructured discussion around their experiences with medicinal cannabis use.

Results

Using inductive thematic analysis, seven broad categories were identified: (1) cannabis use behaviors, (2) reasons for cannabis use, (3) outcomes from cannabis use, (4) facilitators of cannabis use, (5) barriers to cannabis use, (6) stigma around cannabis use, and (7) questions and concerns about cannabis use.

Conclusions

Most veterans initiated cannabis use to manage the symptoms of preexisting medical and/or mental health conditions. Despite some negative side effects, most veterans reported improvements in their overall quality of life, sleep, relationships, mood, and pain. Concern remains around the discrepancy between veterans' qualitative reports of beneficial outcomes from medicinal cannabis use and equivocal findings around the benefit-to-harm ratio in the wider literature. Currently, the VAC reimbursement program remains challenged by unclear indication for which veterans, with what condition(s), at what dose, and in what form medical cannabis is most beneficial.

The role of cannabis clinics in the health system: a qualitative study of physicians' views in New Zealand

BACKGROUND

Privately-owned cannabis clinics have sprung up in many jurisdictions where medicinal cannabis has been legalised and provide an alternative pathway for patients who are unable or unwilling to access a prescription for cannabis-based medicinal products from their usual healthcare providers.

AIMS

This study aimed to explore physicians' views on cannabis clinics, including their perceptions of the role cannabis clinics play in the wider health system.

METHODS

A qualitative study using in-depth, semi-structured interviews with thirty-one physicians affiliated with private and community clinics in New Zealand (including cannabis clinicians, GPs, and specialist doctors). The interviews were conducted from July to December 2021. Data were transcribed and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Cannabis clinicians positioned themselves as (1) "service providers", facilitating consumer access to cannabis prescriptions and products, and (2) "educators", providing advice to patients and the wider physician community. While general practitioners and specialists recognised the benefits of specialised cannabis clinics (i.e., knowledge of products and a non-judgmental environment), they questioned the limited evidence of clinical efficacy for cannabis, potential financial conflicts of interests of cannabis clinicians that may blur their clinical judgement, and the risk of compartmentalising patients' healthcare.

CONCLUSIONS

Our paper raises a number of challenges with attempting to integrate cannabis clinics into the wider health system.

Description and Disposition of Patients With Cancer Accessing a Novel, Pharmacist-Led Cannabis Consultation Service

PURPOSE

The Cannabis Consultation Service (CCS) is an innovative pharmacist-led resource at the Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre. Its mandate is to provide education and guide patients through access and appropriate use of high-quality plant-derived cannabinoids (PDCs). Our objective was to describe the CCS, explain its processes, and characterize patient disposition with respect to use of PDCs.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the charts of patients referred to the CCS from July 13, 2020, to March 05, 2021. We used descriptive statistics to report on the patient population and service metrics.

RESULTS

During the 34-week period, 96 patients accessed the CCS (median age, 61 years). The top reasons for CCS consultation were management of cancer pain, insomnia, and general interest. Medical cannabis was supported as an option in 44/96 patients. Reasons for not supporting PDC use included lack of indication, potential drug interaction/contraindication, or requiring treatment with first-line therapy. Of the 40 patients requiring a medical document, 22 initiated therapy. The most common product used was a 2:50 THC:CBD (Tetrahydrocannabinol:Cannabidiol) cannabis oil. At the date of last contact, few patients remained on therapy because of lack of benefit, patient choice, and/or hesitancy.

CONCLUSION

Despite patients with cancer having interest in seeking PDCs for symptom management, only a few initiated and continued therapy. Pharmacists have an opportunity to advise patients and the oncology team on the risks and benefits of PDCs. These results can be used to support the development of medical cannabis programs by oncology centers and focus future research priorities.

Medical cannabis authorization patterns, safety, and associated effects in older adults

Background

Use of medical cannabis is increasing among older adults. However, few investigations have examined cannabis use in this population.

Methods

We assessed the authorization patterns, safety, and effects of medical cannabis in a sub-analysis of 201 older adults (aged ≥ 65 years) who completed a 3-month follow-up during this observational study of patients who were legally authorized a medical cannabis product (N = 67). Cannabis authorization patterns, adverse events (AEs), Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale-revised (ESAS-r), and Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (BPI-SF) data were collected.

Results

The most common symptoms for which medical cannabis was authorized were pain (159, 85.0%) and insomnia (9, 4.8%). At baseline and at the 3-month follow-up, cannabidiol (CBD)-dominant products were authorized most frequently (99, 54%), followed by balanced products (76, 42%), and then delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-dominant products (8, 4.4%). The most frequent AEs were dizziness (18.2%), nausea (9.1%), dry mouth (9.1%), and tinnitus (9.1%). Significant reductions in ESAS-r scores were observed over time in the domains of drowsiness (p = .013) and tiredness (p = .031), but not pain (p = .106) or well-being (p = .274). Significant reductions in BPI-SF scores over time were observed for worst pain (p = .010), average pain (p = .012), and overall pain severity (p = 0.009), but not pain right now (p = .052) or least pain (p = .141).

Conclusions

Overall, results suggest medical cannabis was safe, well-tolerated, and associated with clinically meaningful reductions in pain in this sample of older adults. However, the potential bias introduced by the high subject attrition rate means that all findings should be interpreted cautiously and confirmed by more rigorous studies.

Integrated Medical Cannabis Consultations in a Palliative Care Program: Policies, Procedures, and Progress after Six Years of Practice

Introduction: Our academic ambulatory palliative care program has counseled, monitored, and certified patients for cannabis as part of routine palliative care practice for six years. Objective: We describe the population certified for cannabis and policies, procedures, and medicolegal challenges in our palliative care clinic. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients, qualifying diagnoses for cannabis certification, reasons for referral, and number of annual certifications. Results: Between 2015 and 2021, we certified 1711 patients for cannabis. The most common indications were cancer (64%), pain (24%), and neuropathy (9%). Other three months in 2021, 28% of new referrals to our practice were certified for cannabis and 15% of patients were referred explicitly for cannabis certification. Conclusion: Despite legal and practical challenges to implementing a medical cannabis program, our palliative care program has fully integrated cannabis as part of our standard outpatient clinical practice.

Cannabidiol use and effectiveness: real-world evidence from a Canadian medical cannabis clinic

BACKGROUND

Cannabidiol (CBD) is a primary component in the cannabis plant; however, in recent years, interest in CBD treatments has outpaced scientific research and regulatory advancement resulting in a confusing landscape of misinformation and unsubstantiated health claims. Within the limited results from randomized controlled trials, and lack of trust in product quality and known clinical guidelines and dosages, real-world evidence (RWE) from countries with robust regulatory frameworks may fill a critical need for patients and healthcare professionals. Despite growing evidence and interest, no real-world data (RWD) studies have yet investigated patients' reports of CBD impact on symptom control in the common expression of pain, anxiety, depression, and poor wellbeing. The objective of this study is to assess the impact of CBD-rich treatment on symptom burden, as measured with a specific symptom assessment scale (ESAS-r).

METHODS

This retrospective observational study examined pain, anxiety, depression symptoms, and wellbeing in 279 participants over 18 years old, prescribed with CBD-rich treatment at a network of clinics dedicated to medical cannabis in Quebec, Canada. Data were collected at baseline, 3 (FUP1), and 6 (FUP2) month after treatment initiation. Groups were formed based on symptom severity (mild vs moderate/severe) and based on changes to treatment plan at FUP1 (CBD vs THC:CBD). Two-way mixed ANOVAs were used to assess ESAS-r scores differences between groups and between visits.

RESULTS

All average ESAS-r scores decreased between baseline and FUP1 (all ps < 0.003). The addition of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) during the first follow-up had no effect on symptom changes. Patients with moderate/severe symptoms experienced important improvement at FUP1 (all ps < 0.001), whereas scores on pain, anxiety, and wellbeing of those with mild symptoms actually increased. Differences in ESAS-r scores between FUP1 and FUP2 were not statistically different.

CONCLUSION

This retrospective observational study suggests CBD-rich treatment has a beneficial impact on pain, anxiety, and depression symptoms as well as overall wellbeing only for patients with moderate to severe symptoms; however, no observed effect on mild symptoms. The results of this study contribute to address the myths and misinformation about CBD treatment and demand further investigation.