Differences in cannabis use characteristics, routines, and reasons for use among individuals with and without a medical cannabis card

A preliminary characterization of cannabis oil use and vaporization among individuals who use for medical purposes: A pilot study

Little is known about the naturalistic use of cannabis oil vaporization, a high-potency product with the ability to be administered discreetly. This pilot study evaluated the feasibility of utilizing a "smart" vaporizer and application to assess the timing, frequency, socioenvironmental factors, and substance use involved in cannabis oil vaporization. Adults with a medical cannabis registration card were recruited from a dispensary in Rhode Island and completed a 2-week study monitoring period using the Gram1 vaporizer, followed by a poststudy qualitative interview. The sample included nine adults who were predominantly male (89%), 100% White, and 100% non-Hispanic. The Gram1 collected topographical vaping data, and the cellphone application utilized ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to assess socioenvironmental factors and other substance use. Qualitative interview data were coded, and illustrative quotations were selected to support quantitative findings. A total of 224 vaping sessions were recorded reflecting 76.4% of the study monitoring period. There was an average of 1.79 vaping sessions per day across all days. Participants took 8.76 puffs on average (SD = 8.23) per vaping session, and the session lasted 2.59 min on average (SD = 4.19). Regular vaporization was exhibited across days of the week and hours of the day. EMA reports indicated that smoking cannabis flower was the most common additional mode of cannabis administration. This study utilized a naturalistic design with novel topographical data and EMA to characterize cannabis oil vaporization. These findings establish the feasibility of collecting objective, momentary data to better understand use behaviors which are critical to informing safe consumption. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Cannabis use among workers with work-related injuries and illnesses: results from a cross-sectional study of workers' compensation claimants in Ontario, Canada

OBJECTIVES

Little is known about how workers use cannabis following a work-related injury/illness, including whether they receive clinical guidance. The objective was to compare characteristics of workers using and not using cannabis after a work-related injury/illness and describe use patterns.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Workers who experienced a work-related physical injury/illness resulting in one or more days of lost time compensated by the workers' compensation authority in Ontario, Canada (n=1196).

METHODS

Participants were interviewed 18 or 36 months after their injury/illness. Participants were asked about their past-year cannabis use, including whether use was for the treatment of their work-related condition. Sociodemographic, work and health characteristics were compared across cannabis groups: no past-year use; use for the work-related condition; use unrelated to the work-related condition. Cannabis use reasons, patterns, perceived impact and healthcare provider engagement were described.

RESULTS

In total, 27.4% of the sample reported using cannabis (14.1% for their work-related condition). Workers using cannabis for their condition were less likely to be working (58.0%) and more likely to have quite a bit/extreme pain interference (48.5%), psychological distress (26.0%) and sleep problems most/all the time (62.1%) compared with those not using cannabis (74.3%, 26.3%, 12.0% and 38.0%, respectively) and those using cannabis for other reasons (74.2%, 19.5%, 12.0% and 37.1%, respectively) (all p<0.0001). No significant differences were observed in medical authorisations for use among those using cannabis for their condition (20.4%) or unrelated to their condition (15.7%) (p=0.3021). Healthcare provider guidance was more common among those using cannabis for their condition (32.7%) compared with those using for other reasons (17.1%) (p=0.0024); however, two-thirds of this group did not receive guidance.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabis may be used to manage the consequences of work-related injuries/illnesses, yet most do not receive clinical guidance. It is important that healthcare providers speak with injured workers about their cannabis use.

Attitudes to Cannabis Use and Public Prevention Information Among Young Adults: A Qualitative Interview Study With Implications for Prevention Practice

Background

Cannabis use carries an increased risk of ill health and social problems, especially when initiated at a young age. Drug use is influenced by individual beliefs, knowledge, and attitudes, which are, in turn, governed by social and environmental factors. In recent years, a less restrictive attitude toward cannabis has been observed in many countries, with concerns about increased cannabis use among young people. The aim of the current study was to gain a deeper understanding of young adults' attitudes toward cannabis use and public prevention information about cannabis.

Methods

A qualitative interview study was conducted among 32 anonymous informants aged 18-29 years in the Stockholm region. Participants were recruited through purposeful sampling, and semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted using a digital video calling platform. A qualitative content analysis of the interviews was performed to generate categories and codes for cannabis use and attitudes toward prevention information.

Results

Both cannabis users and abstainers perceived some risks with cannabis; however, for many users, the positive effects appeared to outweigh any expected harm. Furthermore, the existing public information was perceived as less credible because of an excessive focus on harm. The informants expressed a desire for neutral facts about the effects of cannabis, delivered by credible senders. Moreover, they felt that prevention information should be delivered by individuals whom young people look up to or with whom they can identify, for example, people with authority or famous people such as influencers. The informants also underlined the importance of dialogue with the target group and taking young people's experiences into account when providing information about cannabis.

Conclusion

Current risk awareness associated with cannabis use among young adults is insufficient to prevent them from using cannabis. Public prevention information should preferably combine a fact-based focus on risks with recognition of cannabis' short-term desired effects, delivered by credible senders with authority or those with whom young people can identify.