New York Physicians' Perspectives and Knowledge of the State Medical Marijuana Program

Therapeutic Use of Cannabinoids in Critically Ill Patients: A Survey of Intensive Care Physicians in Germany

Background: In the course of the legalization of cannabis for therapeutic purposes in Germany, there has been growing interest in the medical use of cannabinoids. To date, the therapeutic potential of cannabinoids for the treatment of critically ill patients has not been explored. Objectives: This study aims to understand better whether and how frequently cannabinoids have been administered to critically ill patients in recent years. Study Design: Initially, a survey was conducted among physicians working in intensive care units (ICUs) at the Hannover Medical School. Subsequently, 653 physicians working in ICUs throughout Germany were surveyed. The frequency and regimen of cannabinoid therapy initiated by the participating physicians in the last 2 years at the time of the survey were characterized. Results: Eight out of 9 physicians at Hannover Medical School and 59 out of 653 physicians in ICUs in Germany participated. At Hannover Medical School, 6 out of 8 physicians and in ICUs in Germany, 16 out of 59 physicians had used cannabinoids in some patients (mainly 9-10) during the 2-year period studied, with dronabinol in doses between 1 and 20 mg being their cannabinoid of choice. Metabolic and psychological distress and medication savings, followed by pain and nausea/vomiting, were the most frequently cited indications for cannabinoid therapy. No relevant safety issues arrived. Lack of personal experience, limited evidence, and gaps in knowledge were the most commonly cited reservations about cannabinoid use. Conclusions: During a 2-year period, dronabinol is used in a few critically ill patients in ICUs. The main indications are to reduce metabolic and psychological distress and to save medication. The majority of participating physicians indicated that the use of cannabinoids in the context of critical care medicine needs further exploration.

Differences in Cannabidiol-Related Attitudes and Practice Behaviors Between U.S. Primary Care Physicians Practicing in a Single Health Care System Across States With and Without Marijuana Legalization

Introduction: Dramatic shifts in marijuana laws, along with federal deregulation of hemp with the 2018 Farm Bill, have resulted in increased availability and use of cannabidiol (CBD) supplements throughout the United States (US). Given the rapid increase in CBD use in the U.S. general population, in this study, we aim to characterize primary care physician (PCP) attitudes and practice behaviors and to assess whether differences in provider attitudes and behaviors vary as a function of marijuana legalization (ML) status in the state of practice. Materials and Methods: Data are from an online provider survey on CBD supplement-related attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors administered to 508 PCPs as part of a larger mixed methods study. Participating PCPs were recruited from the Mayo Clinic Healthcare Network and provided medical care in primary care settings across four U.S. states (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Florida, and Arizona). Results: The survey response rate was 45.4% (n=236/508). According to providers, CBD was frequently brought up in PCP settings, typically by patients. PCPs were generally hesitant to screen for or discuss CBD with their patients and identified multiple barriers to open patient-provider dialogue about CBD. PCPs practicing in states that had passed ML were more receptive to patients using CBD supplements, whereas PCPs practicing in states that had not passed ML were more concerned about CBD-related side effects. Regardless of state ML status, most PCPs did not feel that they should be recommending CBD supplements to their patients. Most PCPs reported believing that CBD was unhelpful for most conditions for which it is marketed, with chronic non-cancer pain and anxiety/stress being exceptions. PCP respondents generally felt that they had insufficient knowledge/training around CBD. Conclusions: Results from this mixed methods study show that PCPs practicing in the U.S. rarely screen for or discuss CBD use with their patients and report several barriers to engage in proactive CBD-focused practice behaviors. Furthermore, survey results show that some PCP attitudes, practice behaviors, and barriers vary as a function of state ML status. These findings may guide medical education efforts and inform primary care practice modifications aimed at enhancing screening and monitoring of patient CBD use by PCPs.

Unlocking the Healing Potential: Cannabinoids in Spine Surgery for Pain Relief and Recovery

» Cannabinoids, such as D9-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol, interact with endocannabinoid receptors in the central nervous system and immune system, potentially offering pain relief. The entourage effect, resulting from the interaction of multiple cannabis components, may enhance therapeutic impact and efficacy, making them promising candidates for exploring pain relief in spine operations, known to be among the most painful operative procedures.» The use of cannabinoids in pain management requires careful consideration of safety, including their cognitive and psychomotor effects, potential cardiovascular risks, risk of dependence, mental health implications, and drug interactions.» Few studies have analyzed cannabinoid use in relation to spine surgery, with variable results reported, indicating possible effects on reoperation rates, mortality, complications, postoperative opioid use, and length of hospital stay.» Current knowledge gaps exist in the understanding of cannabinoid effects on spine surgery, including the exploration of different administration routes, timing, dosage, and specific outcomes. In addition, mechanistic explanations for the observed results are lacking.» Ethical considerations related to informed consent, medical expertise, societal impact, and legal compliance must also be thoroughly addressed when considering the utilization of cannabinoids in spinal pathologies and back pain treatment.

Physician Trainees' Perception of Cannabidiol Use in Medicine: A Survey Study

PURPOSE

Given the ongoing national opiate crisis, physicians have been challenged with mitigating the risk of opiate dependence in their patients. With current physician efforts to mitigate the risks of treating pain with opioid prescriptions, this study evaluates medical students' and residents' understanding and perceptions regarding cannabidiol (CBD) in current medical care and their future medical practice.

METHODS

Orthopedic residents from all American programs and medical students from 50 medical schools, regardless of training year or future specialty plans, were eligible to participate in this survey-based study administered from December 2022 to March 2023. The surveys ask questions about demographic information, what education they receive on CBD utilization in medicine, thoughts on CBD effectiveness in pain control, and future plans on utilizing CBD.

RESULTS

A total of 55 residents (1.4%) and 53 medical students (5.1%) responded. Trainees in CBD-legal states were more likely to work with physicians who use CBD in their practice. Most trainees, regardless of location, believe CBD use has a stigma attached to it. Many responders were concerned about the role of CBD in pain control. Finally, most trainees believed that CBD is easy to access if desired and is affordable to purchase.

CONCLUSION

The trajectory of CBD use in the United States indicates that the therapeutic benefits of CBD will be targeted, and future physicians are not always provided adequate educational opportunities to learn about its potential medical uses. Continued training as well as interactions with patients may help decrease the stigma surrounding medical CBD use and help solidify its therapeutic use in pain control.

Cannabis dispensary staff approaches to counseling on potential contraindications to cannabis use: insights from a national self-report survey

BACKGROUND

Legal cannabis is available in more than half of the United States. Health care professionals (HCPs) rarely give recommendations on dosing or safety of cannabis due to limits imposed by policy and lack of knowledge. Customer-facing cannabis dispensary staff, including clinicians (pharmacists, nurses, physician's assistants), communicate these recommendations in the absence of HCP recommendations. Little is known about how dispensary staff approach individuals with complex medical and psychiatric comorbidities. Using responses from a national survey, we describe how cannabis dispensary staff counsel customers with medical and psychiatric comorbidities on cannabis use and examine whether state-specific cannabis policy is associated with advice given to customers.

METHODS

National, cross-sectional online survey study from February 13, 2020 to October 2, 2020 of dispensary staff at dispensaries that sell delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol containing products. Measures include responses to survey questions about how they approach customers with medical and psychiatric comorbidities; state medicalization score (scale 0-100; higher score indicates more similarity to regulation of traditional pharmacies); legalized adult-use cannabis (yes/no). We conducted multiple mixed effects multivariable logistic regression analyses to understand relationships between state medicalization and dispensary employees' perspectives.

RESULTS

Of 434 eligible respondents, most were budtenders (40%) or managers (32%), and a minority were clinicians (18%). State medicalization score was not associated with responses to most survey questions. It was associated with increased odds of encouraging customers with medical comorbidities to inform their traditional HCP of cannabis use (Odds ratio [OR]=1.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-1.4, p=0.03) and reduced odds of recommending cannabis for individuals with cannabis use disorder (CUD) (OR=0.8, 95% CI 0.7-1.0, p=0.04). Working in a state with legalized adult-use cannabis was associated with recommending traditional health care instead of cannabis in those with serious mental illness (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.1-4.7, p=0.04). Less than half of respondents believed they had encountered CUD (49%), and over a quarter did not believe cannabis is addictive (26%).

CONCLUSIONS

When managing cannabis dosing and safety in customers with medical and psychiatric comorbidity, dispensary staff preferred involving individuals' traditional HCPs. Dispensary staff were skeptical of cannabis being addictive. While state regulations of dispensaries may impact the products individuals have access to, they were not associated with recommendations that dispensary staff gave to customers. Alternative explanations for dispensary recommendations may include regional or store-level variation not captured in this analysis.

Addressing cannabis consumption among patients with hyperemesis gravidarum

Severe nausea and vomiting of pregnancy and hyperemesis gravidarum affect up to 3% of all pregnant people, causing substantial maternal and neonatal morbidity, suffering, and financial cost. Evidence supports the association of cannabis consumption with symptoms of severe nausea and vomiting of pregnancy or hyperemesis gravidarum as the general public has come to believe that cannabis is a natural, safe antiemetic. Cannabis consumption in pregnancy is discouraged strongly by the Surgeon General of the United States and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists because of evidence of potential harms. Symptoms of intractable, severe nausea and vomiting of pregnancy or hyperemesis gravidarum associated with cannabis consumption may be unrecognized cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, and this syndrome may be more common than previously thought. Cannabis consumption is especially detrimental when causing or exacerbating debilitating symptoms such as the intense, persistent, recurrent, or cyclic vomiting and associated dehydration and other sequelae of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome. Open discussion of cannabis consumption during pregnancy is very challenging for patients and maternity care providers in our current environment of variable legal status across states and variable degrees of personal and societal acceptance. Evidence-based medical knowledge, guidance, tools, and skills are needed to differentially diagnose and treat cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome in pregnancy. Researchers, clinicians, and medical specialty organizations must work together to strengthen the evidence base and develop or refine the necessary guidelines and tools for maternity care provider skill development, and to increase public and patient awareness of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, specifically during pregnancy.

Medical and recreational cannabis: A cross-sectional survey assessing a sample of physicians' attitudes, knowledge and experience in a university hospital in Lebanon

CONTEXT

A law legalizing the farming of medical cannabis for the international market was passed in Lebanese parliament in April 2020. Thus, this makes Lebanon the first Arab country to legalize medical cannabis, a law which can hold potential public health consequences. The advocates of legalization of medical cannabis in society and in the media influence the public opinion. A community of Lebanese physicians was the first to be asked about this subject.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess a sample of physicians' opinions, knowledge and experiences with medical and non-medical cannabis.

METHOD

All physicians of every speciality working at the Hôtel Dieu de France-Beirut hospital (450) received by email a 33-question-online survey in French between November 2020 and December 2020. The survey was designed based on similar studies published outside of Lebanon.

RESULTS

Eighty-five Lebanese physicians responded to the survey and 80% of them supported the decriminalization of medical cannabis in Lebanon. But only 16% reported knowing the indications of medical cannabis, and only 24% stated that they have adequate knowledge of its secondary effects. Eighty-eight percent of them felt that they might be more comfortable discussing the option of medical cannabis if they had formal education on the subject.

CONCLUSION

Even though the majority of the sample who participated in this study seemed to approve the use of medical cannabis, they lacked the knowledge and confidence to do it. Therefore, this study highlights the need of physician training in the subject of medical cannabis. Future well-conducted university studies will produce evidence-based-guidelines for medical cannabis indications and side effects.

Knowledge and Attitude of Saudi Physicians Toward Cannabidiol for Pediatric Epilepsy: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological diseases. Various institutions have shown an interest to investigate the role of cannabidiol (CBD) in treating pediatric epilepsy. CBD is a chemical extracted from the cannabis plant and lacks the euphoria-inducing characteristic. Despite the FDA approval, the physicians' attitude toward CBD is controversial. Therefore, we aim to measure physicians' knowledge and acceptance of the use of CBD in managing epilepsy patients in Saudi Arabia. Objectives The aim of this study is to measure the knowledge and attitude of physicians regarding CBD use in pediatric epilepsy. Methods In this cross-sectional study, a validated electronic survey was distributed in the period between September 2021 and October 2021 among pediatricians and neurologists at King Abdulaziz Medical City. The survey consisted of four sections: demographics, the perceived knowledge regarding CBD, the knowledge test, and the attitudes toward CBD. Three-scoring systems were established to assess these sections. Results A total of 94 participants were included in this study; 50% of them were males, 81.9% of the participants were in the pediatric field, 13.8% were in the field of neurology, and 4.3% were pediatric neurologists. As for the professional tenure, approximately half of the participants were residents/trainees. Overall, respondents tend to have low perceived knowledge (94.7%) and attitude (93.6%) regarding CBD use. The perceived knowledge and attitude levels were found to be significantly associated with specialty (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively). Pediatric neurologists had a significantly higher self-assessment score, while pediatricians had the lowest attitude level (p < 0.05). For the knowledge test, surprisingly only one respondent answered all questions correctly, and age was found to be significantly associated with knowledge score (p = 0.001). Conclusion This study demonstrates that physicians have poor knowledge and attitude levels regarding the usage of CBD in pediatric epilepsy. Therefore, more education is highly suggested before the introduction of this medication to Saudi patients.

Consumer Experiences with Delta-8-THC: Medical Use, Pharmaceutical Substitution, and Comparisons with Delta-9-THC

Introduction: Cannabis products containing delta-8-THC became widely available in most of the United States in late 2020 and rapidly became a significant source of revenue for hemp processing companies, especially in states where use of delta-9-THC remains illegal or requires professional authorization for medical use. Scientific research on the use of delta-8-THC is scarce, previous clinical studies included a combined total of 14 participants, leading some state governments to prohibit it until its properties and effects are better understood. Methods: Researchers developed an online survey for delta-8-THC consumers addressing a broad range of issues regarding delta-8-THC, including use for the treatment of health and medical conditions. Previous survey studies on the medical use of cannabis and cannabis products informed survey components. Results: Patterns of delta-8-THC use had both similarities with and differences from the use of delta-9-THC cannabis and products. Administration methods were primarily edibles (64%) and vaping concentrates (48%). About half of the participants (51%) used delta-8-THC to treat a range of health and medical conditions, primarily anxiety or panic attacks (69%), stress (52%), depression or bipolar disorder (46%), and chronic pain (41%). Participants compared delta-8-THC very favorably with both delta-9-THC and pharmaceutical drugs and reported substantial levels of substitution for both. Most participants did not inform their primary care provider of their delta-8-THC use (78%) and were not confident of their primary care provider's ability to integrate medical cannabis into their treatment (70%). Knowledge of effective dosages was low, and participants' knowledge of delta-8-THC was primarily from the Internet and their own experiences. Conclusion: Harm reduction is a central component of public health. Although the legal environment is becoming more restrictive for delta-8-THC in comparison to delta-9-THC, results suggest that delta-8-THC may be equally effective for desired purposes of cannabis use and lower in undesirable or adverse effects. All policies and practices should be informed by empirical evidence. Considerable research will be needed to systematically verify the patterns reported by participants, and collaborations among academic researchers, government, and the cannabis industry may be valuable in developing the knowledge base for delta-8-THC and other cannabinoids.

Attitudes Toward the Use of Medical Cannabis and the Perceived Efficacy, Side-effects and Risks: A Survey of Patients, Nurses and Physicians

Gaps between physician and patient perceptions may lead to misunderstandings and mismanage of treatment. There are sparse data about the differences in opinions toward medical cannabis (MC) between patients and health professionals. The aim of this study was to examine the attitudes toward MC, its perceived efficacy, side effects and risk of dependency, among patients, nurses and physicians. A cross-sectional study of samples of 430 patients, 65 nurses and 65 physicians in two large medical centers in Israel. Questionnaires were administered on attitudes, perceived efficacy, side-effects and perceived risks of dependency. Compared with nurses and physicians, patients who were using MC had the most positive attitudes toward MC (p < .001). Younger age, high school education, being Jewish and ever using MC, were associated with more positive attitudes toward MC among patients (p < .001). Among nurses and physicians, having an oncology specialty predicted more positive attitudes toward MC. Physicians had a less positive attitude toward MC compared to nurses (p < .01). Our study provides evidence that physicians are less positive in their views toward MC compared to nurses and patients. More information and awareness to MC may reduce the gap in perceptions between physicians and patients.

Healthcare professionals' perspectives on the use of medicinal cannabis to manage chronic pain: A systematic search and narrative review

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES

Chronic pain is a global public health problem that negatively impacts individuals' quality of life and imposes a substantial economic burden on societies. The use of medicinal cannabis (MC) is often considered by patients to help manage chronic pain as an alternative or supplement to more conventional treatments, given enabling legalization in a number of countries. However, healthcare professionals involved in providing guidance for patients related to MC are often doing so in the absence of strong evidence and clinical guidelines. Therefore, it is crucial to understand their perspectives regarding the clinical use and relevance of MC for chronic pain. As little is known about attitudes of HCPs with regard to MC use for chronic pain specifically, the aim of this review was to identify and synthesize the published evidence on this topic.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted across six databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed from 2001 to March 26, 2021. Three authors independently performed the study selection and data extraction. Thematic analysis was undertaken to identify key themes.

RESULTS

A total of 26 studies were included, involving the United States, Israel, Canada, Australia, Ireland, and Norway, and the perspectives of physicians, nurses, and pharmacists. Seven key themes were identified: MC as a treatment option for chronic pain, and perceived indicated uses; willingness to prescribe MC; legal issues; low perceived knowledge and the need for education; comparative safety of MC versus opioids; addiction and abuse; and perceived adverse effects; CONCLUSION: To support best practice in the use of MC for chronic pain, healthcare professionals require education and training, as well as clinical guidelines that provide evidence-based information about efficacy, safety, and appropriate dosage of products for this indication. Until these gaps are addressed, healthcare professionals will be limited in their capacity to make treatment recommendations about MC for people/patients with chronic pain.

Healthcare practitioner perceptions on barriers impacting cannabis prescribing practices

Background

Canadians seeking medical cannabis (MC) may encounter difficulties in finding a healthcare provider (HCP) who authorizes their access to it. Barriers that HCPs face in authorizing MC are unclear. The objectives of this study were to evaluate HCP opinions, knowledge, comfort, and practice in MC prescribing and counseling on recreational cannabis use, and whether the COVID-19 pandemic affected MC prescribing practices.

Methods

Eligible participants included HCPs (e.g., attending physicians, nurses, pharmacists) in Canada. A questionnaire evaluating their knowledge, comfort, and practice in medical and recreational cannabis was designed based on instruments developed in previous studies. Between April 13th-December 13th 2021, ninety-one healthcare associations were asked to distribute the survey to their members, and an advertisement was placed in the online Canadian Medical Association Journal. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the results.

Results

Twenty-four organizations agreed to disseminate the survey and 70 individuals completed it. Of respondents, 71% were attending physicians or medical residents, while the remainder were nurses, pharmacists or other HCPs. Almost none (6%) received training in MC in professional school but 60% did receive other training (e.g., workshops, conferences). Over half (57%) received more questions regarding MC since recreational cannabis was legalized, and 82% reported having patients who use MC. However, 56% felt uncomfortable or ambivalent regarding their knowledge of MC, and 27% were unfamiliar with the requirements for obtaining MC in Canada. The most common symptoms for recommending MC were pain and nausea, whereas the most common conditions for recommending it were cancer and intractable pain. The strongest barrier to authorizing MC was uncertainty in safe and effective dosage and routes of administration. The strongest barrier to recommending or authorizing MC was the lack of research evidence demonstrating its safety and efficacy. During the pandemic, many respondents reported that a greater number of their patients used cannabis to relieve anxiety and depression.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that HCPs across Canada who responded to our survey are unfamiliar with topics related to MC. The strongest barriers appear to be lack of clinical research, and uncertainty in safe and effective MC administration. Increasing research, training, and knowledge may help HCPs feel more equipped to make informed treatment/prescribing decisions, which may help to improve access to MC.

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.

Exploratory Factor Analysis of Medical Students’ Perceptions of Medical Cannabis Scale

Background

There are few published research articles investigating medical students’ perceptions of medical cannabis (MC), including their attitudes toward its efficacy and appropriateness in medicine, concerns for potential adverse effects, and their willingness to prescribe it to patients (in future practice). This research investigated the factor structure of a tool to assess medical students’ perceptions of MC for the purpose of curriculum enhancement.

Methods

Using a voluntary electronic survey, quantitative data were collected between January and March 2022 from 526 medical students enrolled in a large medical school in Florida, United States. A 32-item questionnaire developed by the researchers was used to investigate medical students’ perceptions of MC. The survey was anonymous and took about 10 minutes to complete. Bivariate correlation analyses were conducted prior to performing a principal component analysis with varimax rotation.

Results

Using principal component analysis with varimax rotation, three factors were identified with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 and a cumulative variance of 59.694%. These factors are perceived knowledge of MC, concern for possible adverse effects of MC (e.g., the potential for misuse/dependence), and attitudes toward MC (e.g., cannabis having an acceptable role in medicine, willingness (as a future physician) to help patients access MC, obtaining training about MC in school and residency training, the physician’s role as a prescriber, and efficacy and benefits of MC for certain health conditions).

Conclusions

The development of this kind of brief measure may be valuable for defining the future educational needs of medical students and other health professionals as well as a tool for future research.

Attitudes, beliefs and knowledge about medical cannabis among nurses and midwives in Cyprus: a cross-sectional descriptive correlational study

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of evidence on healthcare professionals' attitudes, knowledge, and beliefs about medical cannabis in Cyprus and across the world. Therefore, the present study aimed to explore the attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge about MC use among nurses and midwives in Cyprus. Special focus was given to differences across gender, age, religion, marital status, and years of work experience.

METHODS

A descriptive, cross-sectional correlational study with internal comparisons was conducted during the 26^th Nurses and Midwives Congress in Cyprus. All active nurses and midwives (convenience sampling), from the private and national healthcare services (n = 526) were eligible to participate. To analyze the data, the Pearson Chi-square test for group differences was employed, and descriptive and inferential statistics were assessed.

RESULTS

The final sample population consisted of 232 nurses and midwives (response rate of 46.4%). In total, 67(28.9%) participants were male, and 165(71.1%) were female. Cypriot nurses and midwives reported lack of knowledge regarding the risks and benefits about MC use to patients. However, specific number of participants believed MC use was considered acceptable for the patients with persistent muscle spasms, insomnia/sleeping disorders, mental health conditions, and terminal illnesses. The vast majority of the participants believed that formal training on MC should be integrated into academic programs, and expressed the necessity of urgent training under the current curriculum, as well as, educational training programs about MC use should be integrated into the practice/clinical practice. Concerning the socio-demographic characteristics of the participants, gender had a statistically significant positive effect on participants' attitudes and beliefs about MC (p < 0.01, 26.8% vs. 13.4%). Male and unmarried participants reported higher frequency about cannabis use for recreational purposes, compared with female group (p < 0.01, 22.8%Vs 11.4%). Unmarried participants agreed that using cannabis might develop serious mental health risks compared with married participants group (p < 0.05, 77.9% vs. 66.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

The conclusions seem to be rather recommending in favor of MC use. Participants proposed enriching nursing curricula with theoretical and clinical/laboratory courses about MC during studies and clinical practice. Additional tailoring interventions should be established to decrease recreational cannabis use among Cypriot nurses and midwives.

Physician Communication and Perceived Stigma in Prenatal Cannabis Use

Cannabis has long been widely used throughout the prenatal period. However, motives for prenatal cannabis use (PCU) have not been comprehensively examined. Stigmatization has been identified as a barrier to therapeutic cannabis use and related physician communication. Such stigma may be particularly salient in the context of PCU. One hundred and three women who reported current or past pregnancy were recruited online. Participants completed a survey querying prenatal experiences, substance use, and attitudes toward PCU. PCU was reported by 35 (34%) respondents. Treating nausea and vomiting of pregnancy was the most frequently reported reason for PCU (89%), and 24 (69%) reported substituting cannabis for pharmaceutical drugs. Sixty-two percent of PCU participants and 31% of non-PCU participants indicated discomfort discussing PCU with their physician, and 74% of PCU participants and 27% of non-PCU participants indicated they would not disclose PCU to their physician if it occurred in future pregnancies. Our findings suggest that PCU may reflect primarily therapeutic motives of relieving symptoms of morning sickness, nausea, low appetite, pain, and substituting for other prescription medications. Respondents reported discomfort discussing PCU with physicians, which was more pronounced among respondents with lived experience of PCU. Findings suggest PCU might best be evaluated within a therapeutic framework and highlight the importance of efforts to enhance patient-caregiver communication regarding PCU.

Therapeutic Cannabis Use in Kidney Disease: A Survey of Canadian Nephrologists

Rationale & Objective

Cannabis use may be helpful for symptom management in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Knowledge, attitudes, and comfort with use of medical cannabis among kidney care providers may be limiting more widespread evaluation and use. We surveyed Canadian nephrologists regarding current prescribing habits, attitudes, and overall comfort level with cannabis products.

Study Design

We carried out a nationwide, mail-in survey focused on capturing general and practice demographics, current cannabis prescribing status, and knowledge and attitudes regarding therapeutic cannabis use in patients with CKD.

Setting & Population

This survey was distributed to every registered nephrologist in Canada.

Analytical Approach

The results of this survey are reported descriptively.

Results

Responses were received from 208 of 723 (29%) nephrologists. Only 21 (10.1%) respondents currently prescribe cannabis, with chronic pain syndromes being the most frequent reason for cannabis prescription (95.2%). Overall, 116 (55.5%) participants reported that changes in legality of cannabis did not influence their decision to prescribe cannabis. The majority of respondents (n = 123; 59%) indicated that they were uncomfortable with their knowledge of the medical cannabis literature. Most respondents (n=188; 91%) indicated that further studies exploring the efficacy and safety of cannabis would likely influence their prescribing habits.

Limitations

Limitations of this study include possible nonresponse bias and a lack of specific data on practice considerations for specific subpopulations, such as transplant patients.

Conclusions

Only a small minority of Canadian nephrologists currently prescribe cannabis, with relatively little practice change after legalization. There is broad support amongst Canadian nephrologists for encouraging their patients to enroll in efficacy/safety studies of cannabis in the CKD population. Ultimately, given limited therapeutic options available for symptom control in CKD, this survey demonstrates the potential for nationwide practice change if cannabis efficacy and safety can be demonstrated in this population.

Predictors of Medical Students’ Perceptions About Medical Cannabis

Background: There has been a recent uptick in interest regarding the therapeutic properties of cannabis. Evidence exists to support the role of medical cannabis (MC) in chronic illness management for conditions such as posttraumatic stress, pain, and cancer. The majority of physicians in the United States report not knowing how to prescribe or answer questions about MC and receive minimal education about it during training. As MC becomes more socially acceptable with federal legalization in process, new physicians will encounter patients looking for information on the utility and safety of MC. The goal of this research was thus to assess the perceived knowledge, beliefs, and perceptions of medical students towards MC, and to obtain a better understanding of factors that may influence their attitudes.

Methods: A descriptive, cross-sectional study design was used to investigate the medical students’ knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions regarding MC. Quantitative data were collected from 526 medical students (years one to four) via an anonymous, online, 32-item questionnaire to determine if perceived knowledge, concerns about the potential negative effects of cannabis, and certain beliefs would significantly contribute to their attitudes toward MC. Hypothesis testing was conducted using Spearman-rank order correlation and multivariate linear regression analyses.

Results: A statistically significant regression equation was found: (F(4, 428)=114.826, p<.001 with an R²=0.518 [adjusted R² =0.513]) indicating greater perception of knowledge about MC, lower concern for possible negative effects of MC use, greater belief in federal legalization of MC, and greater belief in the federal legalization of recreational cannabis significantly contributed to a higher score on positive attitudes and perceptions toward MC. Moreover, while many participants reported physicians should be able to prescribe MC, they reported that little if any MC education had been provided.

Conclusions: This study identified the knowledge, concerns, and perceptions of medical students regarding MC as well as several factors contributing to their attitudes about it. Favorable attitudes toward MC among patients exist and as its popularity and acceptance among patients continue, more may be asking their physicians about symptomatic and curative treatment with cannabis-based products. Results from this research have the potential to assist medical educators in understanding students’ perceptions about MC to help guide innovative and contemporary curricular advances as a public health imperative.

Cannabis use among patients with cutaneous lymphoma: A cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate patterns of cannabis use in patients with cutaneous lymphoma (CL), as well as the association between cannabis use and itch specifically.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey created in partnership with the Cutaneous Lymphoma Foundation (CLF).

SETTING

The online survey was distributed electronically via email to the CLF listserv and links posted to social media over a 2-week period. Main Outcome Measures Respondents were classified as current cannabis users, prior users, and never users. A visual analog scale (VAS) was used to assess itching severity, improvement of itch, and interest in learning about cannabis.

RESULTS

A total of 119 patient responses (61% female, mean age 59y) were included in analysis. The majority had mycosis fungoides or Sézary syndrome (74%; 88/119) and early stage (IA-IIA) disease (56%; 48/86). Mean VAS itch score was 3.2 + 2.8 for the cohort. Over half (55%; 60/110) reported ever having used cannabis, with 22% (24/110) endorsing current cannabis use. Common methods of cannabis use were smoking (54%) and vaporizing (46%). 25% (6/24) of current users reported using cannabis specifically to treat itch; these respondents noted that cannabis resulted in moderate improvement of itching (mean 6.6/10). There was strong interest in learning more about cannabis and cancer, and most desired this information from their CL doctor/nurse.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabis use is common among patients with CL, and patients report improvement of itching as a result of using cannabis. Further studies are needed to elucidate the risks and benefits of cannabis use in this patient population.

Attitudes and beliefs of medicine and social work students about medical cannabis use for epilepsy

The current study sought: (i) to explore whether health profession students possess formal medical cannabis (MC) education, feel prepared to answer questions about MC, and perceive it as an effective therapy for epilepsy; (ii) to assess students' attitudes and beliefs about MC use; and (iii) to explore the associations between students' background characteristics, MC-related attitudes and beliefs regarding its effectiveness for epilepsy. A sample of 310 students (141 from medicine and 169 from social work) voluntarily participated in the anonymous online survey. The vast majority (92.5%) indicated they had no formal education about MC, and only 11.2 % reported being prepared to answer clients' MC-related questions. Participants reported favorable beliefs about MC benefits, the need for training, and recreational marijuana use legalization. Less supportive attitudes were reported regarding MC risks. Prior cannabis use (e.g., self-use, friends, or family) and individuals from a secular background were associated with more positive beliefs about MC benefits and its legalization for recreational purposes. Prior recreational cannabis use [OR=1.541] and having friends who recreationally use the substance [OR=1.891] were associated with the belief that MC is an effective therapy for epilepsy. These findings indicate an urgent need for students' MC education to provide future physicians and social workers with MC-related capacities. Development of curricula and training programs in Israel are encouraged.

Delta-8-THC: Delta-9-THC's nicer younger sibling?

BACKGROUND

Products containing delta-8-THC became widely available in most of the USA following the 2018 Farm Bill and by late 2020 were core products of hemp processing companies, especially where delta-9-THC use remained illegal or required medical authorization. Research on experiences with delta-8-THC is scarce, some state governments have prohibited it because of this lack of knowledge.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted an exploratory study addressing a broad range of issues regarding delta-8-THC to inform policy discussions and provide directions for future systematic research.

METHODS

We developed an online survey for delta-8-THC consumers, including qualities of delta-8-THC experiences, comparisons with delta-9-THC, and open-ended feedback. The survey included quantitative and qualitative aspects to provide a rich description and content for future hypothesis testing. Invitations to participate were distributed by a manufacturer of delta-8-THC products via social media accounts, email contact list, and the Delta8 Reddit.com discussion board. Participants (N = 521) mostly identified as White/European American (90%) and male (57%). Pairwise t tests compared delta-8-THC effect rating items; one-sample t tests examined responses to delta-9-THC comparison items.

RESULTS

Most delta-8-THC users experienced a lot or a great deal of relaxation (71%); euphoria (68%) and pain relief (55%); a moderate amount or a lot of cognitive distortions such as difficulty concentrating (81%), difficulties with short-term memory (80%), and alerted sense of time (74%); and did not experience anxiety (74%) or paranoia (83%). Participants generally compared delta-8-THC favorably with both delta-9-THC and pharmaceutical drugs, with most participants reporting substitution for delta-9-THC (57%) and pharmaceutical drugs (59%). Participant concerns regarding delta-8-THC were generally focused on continued legal access.

CONCLUSIONS

Delta-8-THC may provide much of the experiential benefits of delta-9-THC with lesser adverse effects. Future systematic research is needed to confirm participant reports, although these studies are hindered by the legal statuses of both delta-8-THC and delta-9-THC. Cross-sector collaborations among academics, government officials, and representatives from the cannabis industry may accelerate the generation of knowledge regarding delta-8-THC and other cannabinoids. A strength of this study is that it is the first large survey of delta-8 users, limitations include self-report data from a self-selected convenience sample.

Clinical Decision Making by Medical Marijuana Physicians in Florida: A Qualitative Assessment

Medical marijuana (MMJ) was legalized in November 2016 with the passing of Amendment 2 in the state of Florida. Since the legalization, many studies have been conducted to understand the direct effect medical marijuana has on specific medical conditions. Unlike most allopathic drugs, medical marijuana does not target single ailments or specific conditions and does not follow precise recommending guidelines. There is scarce knowledge on how patient characteristics, including medical conditions, affect a physician's direct recommendations and registry limits. To obtain insight on the effect patient characteristics have on the clinical decision-making process, we conducted ten qualitative interviews of medical marijuana physicians who are certified to order medical marijuana for patients in Florida. Interview topics ranged from typical daily practice to specific recommendations for patient histories. Each interview was transcribed and thematically analyzed. Five major patient characteristics that influence a physician's recommendation emerged from the interviews: patient medical history, co-medications, lifestyle, marijuana experience level and counter-indications. Each category was analyzed further to understand how the characteristics influenced the practice of recommending and ordering product. Physicians emphasized the equivalent importance of reviewing a patient's medical history, lifestyle, and past marijuana experiences while also expressing the need to look holistically at the individual patient. Instead of the characteristics determining what the physician recommends for the patient and orders through the registry, the characteristics dictate the education given to the patient so that the patient may lead and determine their own individual care.

To Treat or Not to Treat? Polish Physicians' Opinions about the Clinical Aspects of Cannabinoids-An Online Survey

Introduction: Medical cannabis’ importance in Poland increased dramatically following its legalization as the 12th country in Europe in 2017. However, no studies have been published to give insight into Polish physicians’ opinions about medical cannabis. Objectives: To investigate physician’s opinions about cannabinoids’ utility in clinical practice, concerns regarding their safety profile, and their clinical experience with cannabinoids. Methods: The survey using a self-developed tool was conducted online; participants were physicians with or without specialist training. Participation was voluntary. Physicians were recruited through personal networks, palliative care courses, and Medical Chambers. Results: From June to October 2020, we recruited 173 physicians from 15/16 voivodeships. The largest age group (43.9%; n = 76) was 30–39 year-olds. A similar proportion declared they never used cannabis and did not receive any training regarding cannabinoids (60% for both). Only 15 (8%) ever prescribed medical cannabis, although about 50% declared knowing suitable patients for such therapy, and 53.8% had at least one patient proactively asking for such treatment in the last 6 mo. The most common indication chosen was pain: chronic cancer-related (n = 128), chronic non-cancer (n = 77), and neuropathic (n = 60). Other commonly chosen conditions were alleviation of cancer treatment side-effects (n = 56) and cachexia (n = 57). The overall safety profile of THC was assessed as similar to most commonly used medications, including opioids; NSAIDs and benzodiazepines were, however, perceived as safer. Conclusions: Polish physicians favored the legalization of medical cannabis. However, it is of concern that a limited number have any experience with prescribing cannabis. The creation of clear guidelines to advise physicians in their routine practice and education about pain management and the risks related to the consumption of recreational cannabis for medical conditions are needed.

Clinician views on and ethics priorities for authorizing medical cannabis in the care of children and youth in Canada: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The use of cannabis for medical purposes by pediatric patients is expanding across Canada; however, supporting evidence, federal regulations and treatment guidelines are lacking. To understand factors affecting treatment decisions in this landscape, we sought to delineate clinician perspectives, ethics priorities and values for cannabis authorization.

METHODS

We sampled participants purposefully through Canadian Childhood Cannabinoid Clinical Trials listservs, which include the majority of pediatric oncologists and palliative care physicians practising in Canada, among many other pediatric physicians and clinicians. Inclusion criteria were being a practising clinician in Canada, involvement in the care of children and willingness to be interviewed regardless of stance on medical cannabis. In November and December 2020, we conducted semistructured interviews focusing on principles, values and priorities, including medical, professional, regulatory, evidentiary and social considerations, for authorizing medical cannabis to children. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed by means of deductive and inductive thematic methods.

RESULTS

We conducted 18 interviews with a diverse group of clinicians representing a range of specialties within pediatric care, including neurology, palliative care, oncology, family medicine and pharmacology. The interviews yielded 4 themes and 12 subthemes related to a priori (medical, professional, regulatory, evidentiary and social themes) and emergent themes. The 4 themes of access, relationships and relational autonomy (autonomy within relationships), medically appropriate use and research priorities were grounded in principles of harm reduction. Participants described problematic authorization procedures that negatively affect patient use. Principles associated with relational autonomy were highlighted as a feature of open clinical communication. Benefits of appropriate medical uses weighed positively over risks, even in the context of potential effects on neurodevelopment. Participants expressed that more research is essential to align medical cannabis with biomedical standards.

INTERPRETATION

Clinicians reported pursuing ethical use of medical cannabis for pediatric patients and prioritizing their safety under principles of harm reduction. There is a need for evidence about neurodevelopmental risks, support for research, treatment guidelines and greater knowledge about stakeholder perspectives to alleviate burdens related to use of medical cannabis for pediatric patients in Canada.

Marijuana liberalization policies and perinatal health

We studied the effect of marijuana liberalization policies on perinatal health with a multiperiod difference-in-differences estimator that exploited variation in effective dates of medical marijuana laws (MML) and recreational marijuana laws (RML). We found that the proportion of maternal hospitalizations with marijuana use disorder increased by 23% (0.3 percentage points) in the first three years after RML implementation, with larger effects in states authorizing commercial sales of marijuana. This growth was accompanied by a 7% (0.4 percentage points) decline in tobacco use disorder hospitalizations, yielding a net zero effect over all substance use disorder hospitalizations. RMLs were not associated with statistically significant changes in newborn health. MMLs had no statistically significant effect on maternal substance use disorder hospitalizations nor on newborn health and fairly small effects could be ruled out. In absolute numbers, our findings implied modest or no adverse effects of marijuana liberalization policies on the array of perinatal outcomes considered.

Description of collaborative, fee-for-service, office-based, pharmacist-directed medical cannabis therapy management service for patients with chronic pain

BACKGROUND

Treatment with medical cannabis (MC) in the United States tends to be patient-driven in nature despite evidence that suggests that patients have remarkably poor knowledge on the medical use of this treatment modality.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and pilot a collaborative, fee-for-service (FFS), office-based, pharmacist-directed MC therapy management (MCTM) service for patients suffering chronic pain.

PRACTICE DESCRIPTION

A collaborative, FFS, office-based, pharmacist-directed MCTM service where patients are seen after a physician deems them suitable for treatment with MC. The pharmacist designs the initial treatment regimen by selecting a formulation, dose, route, and frequency of administration and then manages ongoing therapy by making regimen changes based on the patient's response, adverse effects, and financial concerns.

PRACTICE INNOVATION

The creation of a specialized service where a registered MC pharmacist is positioned in a collaborating provider's office and sees patients face-to-face for the provision of MCTM services.

EVALUATION METHODS

Patient retention, revenue generated, and ability to replicate the service were evaluated. Patient satisfaction was assessed by collecting subjective feedback on the service.

RESULTS

The pilot site that developed the service has seen 133 patients from 2016 to 2021 and has retained 89% of patients after 5 years of quarterly appointments. Patients appear willing to pay out of pocket for the service, and the revenue generated covers the pharmacist's and collaborating physician's time as well as additional overhead. The service has been replicated at 2 additional sites, and patient feedback has been positive.

CONCLUSIONS

MCTM is another useful pharmacist service that patients are willing to pay for. MCTM services decrease the collaborating provider's workload while still allowing them to offer their patients personalized treatment with MC. In our experience, the service retains patients, generates enough revenue to cover costs, can be replicated, and is well received by patients.

Physicians' experiences, attitudes, and beliefs towards medical cannabis: a systematic literature review

Background

An increasing number of countries legalise the use of medical cannabis or allow it for a narrow range of medical conditions. Physicians, and often the patients’ general practitioner, play a major role in implementing this policy. Many of them, however, perceive a lack of evidence-based knowledge and are not confident with providing patients with medical cannabis. The objectives of this review are to synthesise findings about hospital physicians’ and GPs’ experiences, attitudes, and beliefs towards the use of medical cannabis with the purpose of identifying barriers and facilitators towards providing it to their patients.

Methods

Peer-reviewed articles addressing hospital physicians’ and GPs’ experiences, attitudes, and beliefs towards the use of medical cannabis were searched systematically in PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library.

Results

Twenty-one articles were included from five different countries in which the medical cannabis laws varied. The studied physicians experienced frequent inquiries about medical cannabis from their patients (49–95%), and between 10 and 95% of the physicians were willing to prescribe and/or provide it to the patients, depending on setting, specialty and experience among the physicians. This review found that physicians experienced in prescribing medical cannabis were more convinced of its benefits and less worried about adverse effects than non-experienced physicians. However, physicians specialized in addiction treatment and certain relevant indication areas seemed more sceptical compared to physicians in general. Nevertheless, physicians generally experienced a lack of knowledge of clinical effects including both beneficial and adverse effects.

Conclusion

This review indicates that GPs and hospital physicians from various specialties frequently experience patient demands for medical cannabis and to some degree show openness to using it, although there was a wide gap between studies in terms of willingness to provide. Hospital physicians and GPs’ experienced in prescribing are more convinced of effects and less worried of adverse effects. However, most physicians experience a lack of knowledge of beneficial effects, adverse effects and of how to advise patients, which may comprise barriers towards prescribing. More research, including larger studies with cohort designs and qualitative studies, is needed to further examine facilitators and barriers to physicians’ prescribing practices.

A systematic review of medical students' and professionals' attitudes and knowledge regarding medical cannabis

Background

Recently, the renewed global interest in cannabis’ therapeutic properties has resulted in shifting attitudes and legislative policies worldwide. The aim of this systematic review is to explore the existing literature on medical professionals’ and students’ attitudes and knowledge regarding medicinal cannabis (MC) to assess any relevant and significant trends.

Methods

This systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Using PubMed and Google Scholar, a literature search was performed to identify studies pertaining to healthcare professionals’ and medical students’ knowledge and attitudes regarding MC. There were no search limits on the year of publication; however, studies without primary data (e.g., abstracts, systematic reviews, meta-analyses) and non-English language papers were excluded. Studies were coded according to the following research questions: (1) Do respondents believe that cannabis should be legalized (for medicinal and/or recreational purposes)? (2) Are respondents confident in their level of knowledge regarding cannabis’ clinical applications? (3) Are respondents convinced of cannabis’ therapeutic potential? 4) What current gaps in knowledge exist, and how can the medical community become better informed about cannabis’ therapeutic uses? and (5) Are there significant differences between the knowledge and opinions of healthcare students versus healthcare professionals with respect to any of the aforementioned queries? Chi-square tests were used to assess differences between medical students and medical professionals, and Pearson’s bivariate correlations were used to analyze associations between survey responses and year of publication—as a proxy measurement to assess change over time.

Results

Out of the 741 items retrieved, 40 studies published between 1971 and 2019 were included in the final analyses. In an evaluation of 21 qualified studies (8016 respondents), 49.9% of all respondents favored legalization (SD = 25.7, range: 16–97%). A correlational analysis between the percentage of survey respondents who support MC legalization and year of publication suggests that both medical students’ and professionals’ support for MC legalization has increased from 1991 to 2019 (r(19) = .44, p = .045). Moreover, medical professionals favor the legalization of MC at a significantly higher rate than students (52% vs. 42%, respectively; χ² (1, N = 9019) = 50.72 p < .001). Also, respondents consistently report a strong desire for more education about MC and a substantial concern regarding MC’s potential to cause dependence and addiction. Pearson’s correlations between year of publication and survey responses for both of these queried variables suggest minimal changes within the last decade (2011–2019 for addiction and dependence, 2012-2019 for additional education; r(13) = − .10, p = .713 and r(12) = − .12, p = .678, respectively).

Conclusion

The finding that both medical students’ and professionals’ acceptance of MC has significantly increased in recent decades—in conjunction with their consistent, strong desire for more educational material—suggests that the medical community should prioritize the development of MC educational programs. MC is far more likely to succeed as a safe and viable therapy if the medical professionals who administer it are well-trained and confident regarding its clinical effects. Limitations include a lack of covariate-based analyses and the exclusion of studies published after the literature search was performed (June 2019). Future research should analyze studies published post-2019 to draw temporal comparisons and should investigate the effect of numerous covariates (e.g., gender, religiosity, prior cannabis use) as newer studies gather data on these factors [PROSPERO Registration: CRD42020204382].

Medical Cannabis for Headache Pain: a Primer for Clinicians

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Public acceptance of Cannabis sativa L. (cannabis) as a therapeutic option grows despite lags in both research and clinician familiarity. Cannabis-whether as a medical, recreational, or illicit substance-is and has been commonly used by patients. With ongoing decriminalization efforts, decreased perception of harms, and increased use of cannabis in the treatment of symptoms and disease, it is critical for clinicians to understand the rationale for specific therapies and their medical and practical implications for patients. In view of the opioid crisis, overall patient dissatisfaction, and lack of adherence to current chronic pain and headache therapies, this review provides up-to-date knowledge on cannabis as a potential treatment option for headache pain.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research into the use of cannabinoids for disease treatment have led to FDA-approved drugs for seizures, nausea, and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy; and for decreased appetite and weight loss in people with HIV/AIDS. For a wide variety of conditions and symptoms (including chronic pain), cannabis has gained increasing acceptance in society. The effects of cannabidiol (CBD) and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in pain pathways have been significantly elucidated. An increasing number of retrospective studies have shown a decrease in pain scores after administration of cannabinoids, as well as long-term benefits such as reduced opiate use. Yet, there is no FDA-approved cannabis product for headache or other chronic pain disorders. More is being done to determine who is likely to benefit from cannabis as well as to understand the long-term effects and limitations of the treatment. Cannabis can refer to a number of products derived from the plant Cannabis sativa L. Relatively well-tolerated, these products come in different configurations, types, and delivery forms. Specific formulations of the plant have been shown to be an effective treatment modality for chronic pain, including headache. It is important for clinicians to know which product is being discussed as well as the harms, benefits, contraindications, interactions, and unknowns in order to provide the best counsel for patients.

The effect of medical cannabis laws on pharmaceutical marketing to physicians

Although cannabis is federally prohibited, a majority of U.S. states have implemented medical cannabis laws (MCLs). As more individuals consider the drug for medical treatment, they potentially substitute away from prescription drugs. Therefore, an MCL signals competitor entry. This paper exploits geographic and temporal variation in MCLs to examine the strategic response in direct-to-physician marketing by pharmaceutical firms as cannabis enters the market. Using office detailing records from 2014-2018 aggregated to the county level, we find weak evidence of a relatively small and delayed response in substitute prescription drug- and opioid-related detailing. While these effects on detailing dollars are more pronounced among smaller pharmaceutical firms, the magnitudes are economically small and likely muted at aggregate levels by the small percent of doctors that actively recommend cannabis for medical treatment.

Priorities for Medical Marijuana Research from the Perspective of Physicians, Dispensary Owners/Staff, and Patients: A Survey Study

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> More patients are turning to medical marijuana as an alternative treatment, yet there are apparent knowledge gaps on the risk benefit of medical marijuana for a variety of indications. This study aimed to determine the priorities for medical marijuana research from the perspective of multiple stakeholders including patients, clinicians, and industry representatives. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> An anonymous survey was administered to attendees of the 2019 American Medical Marijuana Physicians Association annual meeting in Orlando, Florida. Respondents completed the survey on paper or smartphone via Qualtrics. The survey included questions on demographics and medical marijuana research priorities under the following broad categories: clinical conditions, safety issues, marijuana types, populations, and others. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Forty-six participants (56.5% female, mean age = 51.6 ± 14.1) responded to the survey. A majority were medical marijuana qualified physicians in Florida (56.5%), 30.5% other physicians or clinicians, and 21.7% medical marijuana patients (multiple choices allowed). The top conditions prioritized for research by this group were chronic pain, cancer, and anxiety, and the top priority safety issues were dosing/product choice, complications from smoking/vaping, and drug interactions. Regarding marijuana types, the group prioritized research on THC/CBD ratios, different modes of consumption, and terpenes. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Findings from this survey indicate that medical marijuana stakeholders perceived a broad range of research topics as priorities. More research is needed to advance the evidence in these areas and provide guidance to patients, physicians, and the medical marijuana industry.

The use of an integrated opioid and medical marijuana prescription drug monitoring program

OBJECTIVES

To (1) identify the reasons for which pharmacists in Connecticut use the CPMRS when dispensing opioid medications and medical marijuana products, (2) determine pharmacists' perceived value of the CPMRS when dispensing opioids or medical marijuana, and (3) compare practices and the perceived value of the CPMRS among community-based pharmacists (CBPs) and medical marijuana dispensary pharmacists (MMDPs).

METHODS

An online survey was administered from May 2019 to June 2019 to CBPs (n = 178) and MMDPs (n = 12). The survey included items about background, use, and attitudes about current and future use of the CPMRS.

RESULTS

Both pharmacist groups indicated that opioid use information was the most useful aspect of the CPMRS. Ninety percent of both groups checked patients' use of opioids using the CPMRS, and 81.2% of the MMDPs compared with 38.4% of the CBPs indicated that they checked for patients' use of medical marijuana. A greater percentage of MMDPs than CBPs felt that access to the marijuana use information was useful and needed for counseling. Several pharmacists recommended improvements in marijuana use information in the CPMRS and greater efficiencies for users of the system.

CONCLUSION

Access to both marijuana and opioid use information can allow pharmacists to make specific recommendations on the basis of potential drug interactions and dose adjustments. The results from the present study highlight how integrated systems of opioid and marijuana dispensing information can be further enhanced by resolving existing pharmacy barriers involving technology, workflow, and need for systems with more detailed marijuana product information.

Attitudes and knowledge about medical cannabis among Israeli and American nursing students

BACKGROUND

Although medical cannabis regulations are emerging in many places around the world, a contentious conundrum remains within the medical establishment regarding the appropriate part that cannabis may have in the provision of health care. Nurses have an indispensable role in the care management of patients, and given the consideration of cannabis as a possible treatment, they are warranted to be aware of its medical properties, as well as to be able to adequately answer patient queries. Nevertheless, very little is currently known about nurses' perceptions related to medical cannabis.

OBJECTIVE

To assess attitudes, beliefs and knowledge about medical cannabis among nursing students.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study in two universities: Rutgers University (RU) in New Jersey and Ben Gurion University of the Negev (BGU) in Israel. In addition to demographic data, the survey instrument included questions about attitudes, beliefs, knowledge, and training.

RESULTS

Overall, 387 students participated, mainly females (87.8%). The vast majority from both sub-groups stated they would recommend cannabis to their patients if allowed to do so (91.2%), and were in agreement that medical cannabis is associated with significant benefits for physical (93.5%) and mental (87.8%) health. Compared to the BGU sub-group, more students from RU stated that they feel prepared to answer patient questions about medical cannabis (19.5% vs. 33.5%, respectively; χ² = 9.74, p < 0.01). While the majority of respondents stated they have not received any formal education related to medical cannabis, they expressed endorsement for such training and education.

CONCLUSIONS

In light of the expanding number of patients who use medical cannabis, this study highlights the importance of incorporating medical cannabis education for nurses in academic and clinical curricula.

Perception and Belief on Cannabinoids: A Comparative Study of Rheumatology Patients and Primary Care Physicians on the Use of Cannabinoids for Pain Management

Introduction

With the recent increase in popularity of cannabinoids in the management of chronic pain, the inquisitiveness among our patients and health care professionals are probably now at its peak. Many treating health care professionals in their clinical practice come across patients who either use cannabinoids or are interested in their efficacy and side effects. As there is paucity of data and research about their use in rheumatology, patient's self-reported responses and experience of primary care physicians (General Practitioners [GPs]) can guide in expanding our knowledge.

Methods

Ours was an observational, cross-sectional study among rheumatology patients and GPs in the Leicestershire area. Initial questionnaire was designed by authors addressing demographics, knowledge, experience and perception. This was piloted among patients and GPs and improvised, redesigned and used for the study. The study design consisted of two arms: first arm including GPs and second arm rheumatology patients.

Results

Arm 1 consisted of 100 GPs with median age group of 30-40 years. 34% GPs experienced their patients inquiring about cannabinoids. 78% did not believe cannabinoids benefited the patients. On a scale of 0-10, the mean benefit in managing pain 3.2 + 2.5. Arm 2 consisted of 102 patients. 16% reported using cannabinoids for managing their chronic pain. The users reported significant improvement in pain compared to non-users (p=0.002). On comparing the perception of cannabinoids between GPs and patients, there was a statistically significant difference regarding awareness and effectiveness (p<0.001).

Conclusion

With the paucity of data and research about the use of cannabinoids in rheumatology, the patient self-reported responses provided an estimate as to their efficacy. This was significantly different from the GP perception. Disease and drug-focused research is need of the hour. To our knowledge, this is the First Single Centre study in the UK evaluating GP and rheumatology patient perception on cannabinoids.

Survey of Pharmacists' Knowledge of Connecticut's Medical Cannabis Program

Introduction: Over the last few years, a growth in research and interest in medical cannabis (most often referred to as medical marijuana) use have occurred nationally. Medical cannabis has become a treatment option for disease conditions, such as epilepsy, wasting syndrome associated with AIDs, and post-traumatic stress disorder, when traditional medication is ineffective. Objectives: The objectives were to identify knowledge deficits of the medical cannabis program (MCP) in Connecticut among Connecticut pharmacists and the impact of MCP on Connecticut pharmacy practice and concerns Connecticut pharmacists have regarding medical cannabis use. Methods: A cross-sectional survey through an online platform, Google forms, was administered for 2 months (October 15, 2017-December 15, 2017). An e-mail containing the link to the survey was e-mailed to all pharmacists whose e-mail addresses were available from the State of Connecticut's Commission of Pharmacy database (n = 6182). Of those with available e-mail addresses, only 5653 pharmacists received the e-mail; the others were rejected upon receipt of our e-mail. Our survey consists of 16 items related to pharmacist demo- graphic information, knowledge assessment, impact on pharmacists' practice, and concerns stemming from medical cannabis. Results: Only 51 (15.2%) respondents believed that Connecticut MCP would impact their practice. Only 39 (11.6%) respondents selected the two correct requirements for patient registration and correctly identified the wrong choices. Only 81 (24.2%) respondents identified the correct approved dose (maximum allowable monthly amount of 2.5 ounces) of medical cannabis. Sixty-eight (20.2%) respondents correctly identified all three approved conditions and all other incorrect conditions. Sixty-five (19.40%) respondents correctly identified all roles of dispensary pharmacists. Majority of respondents, 243 (72.5%), expressed their concern about federal laws regarding cannabis. A total of 98 (29.3%) respondents thought that they were knowledgeable enough about the side effects of medical cannabis to provide appropriate counseling to patients. Conclusion: Overall, the results of our survey found that Connecticut licensed pharmacists had lack of complete and accurate knowledge regarding the state's MCP. As more states legalize medical cannabis, it will be imperative that education of pharmacists and other health care professionals about the MCP and the clinical use of cannabis occur.

Medical cannabis education among healthcare trainees: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

It has been previously demonstrated that healthcare professionals would like additional education on medical cannabis. However, there has not yet been a review of the status of medical cannabis curriculum for medical and allied healthcare trainees worldwide, even though future healthcare workers will be placed on the forefront of patient care and must be prepared to counsel patients. This study was designed to address this gap in knowledge.

DESIGN

A search syntax was generated and databases PubMed, ERIC, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched for relevant articles. A grey literature search of Google Scholar, MedEd, Medline, and the Proquest Dissertations and Theses section was also performed. All titles and abstracts were screened. Selected articles were subsequently screened using predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Allied healthcare trainees lacked sufficient knowledge about medical cannabis and did not feel prepared to counsel patients on this subject. Additionally, they expressed a growing interest in medical cannabis and would like more standardized education on the topic. Finally, faculty and deans in various institutions agreed on the need to educate students on the subject, and aimed to implement courses on medical cannabis or expand their existing curricula.

CONCLUSIONS

While the medical cannabis landscape is developing, medical and allied health students are not properly educated and knowledgeable on this emerging field of clinical care. The findings suggest that the implementation of competencies-based curricula on medical cannabis is essential for medical and allied healthcare trainees to have the appropriate level of knowledge to counsel and educate their patients.

Nephrologist Views Regarding Cannabinoid Use in Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease and Dialysis: A Survey

CONTEXT

The efficacy and safety of cannabinoids to treat symptoms in individuals with kidney disease is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to elicit Canadian nephrologists' views regarding the use and study of cannabinoids in patients with kidney disease in an Internet-based survey of Canadian of Society of Nephrology members treating adult patients with kidney disease including dialysis.

METHODS

The degree to which respondents supported the use or study of cannabinoids for symptoms common in kidney disease was assessed using a modified Likert scale ranging from 1 to 7 (anchored at 1-definitely would not and 7-being definitely would). Participants were asked their degree of support for cannabinoid use in clinical practice and for randomized controlled trials examining cannabinoids for anxiety, depression, restless legs syndrome, itchiness, fatigue, chronic pain, decreased appetite, nausea/vomiting, sleep disorder, and others. Multilevel multivariable linear regression was used to identify independent predictors of the degree of support.

RESULTS

There were 151 (43.4%) responses from 348 eligible participants. One hundred twenty-four (82%) previously cared for patients using prescribed cannabinoids by other providers, and 29 (19%) had previously prescribed cannabinoids themselves. One hundred thirty-seven (91%) had previously cared for patients using nonprescription cannabinoids, which were used most commonly recreationally (88.3%), for chronic pain (73.7%) or for anxiety (52.6%). Respondents supported the use of cannabinoids (mean score >5) for each symptom in the setting of refractory symptoms. Similarly, respondents supported enrolling patients for trials for all symptoms (mean scores >5).

CONCLUSION

Nephrologists broadly support the use and study of cannabinoids for symptoms in patients with kidney disease.

Practice Patterns and Training Needs Among Physicians Certifying Patients for Medical Marijuana in Florida

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the clinical training or practice experiences among physicians who certify patients for medical marijuana. The objective of this study was to determine information sources, factors influencing recommendations, clinical practices in patient assessment, communications, and recommendations, and priority areas for additional training among physicians who certify patients for medical marijuana.

METHODS

A cross-sectional state-wide anonymous survey of registered medical marijuana physicians in Florida between June and October 2020 was administered. Numerical responses were quantified using counts and percentages. The frequencies for "often" and "always" responses were aggregated when appropriate.

RESULTS

Among 116 respondents, the mean (standard deviation) age was 57 (12) years old, and 70% were male. The most frequently used information sources were research articles (n = 102, 95%), followed by online sources (n = 99, 93%), and discussions with other providers and dispensary staff (n = 84, 90%). Safety concerns were most influential in patient recommendations (n = 39, 39%), followed by specific conditions (n = 30, 30%) and patient preferences (n = 26, 30%). Ninety-three physicians (92%) reported they "often" or "always" perform a patient physical exam. Eighty-four (77%) physicians provided specific administration route recommendations. Half (n = 56) "often" or "always" provided specific recommendations for Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol: cannabidiol ratios, while 69 (62%) "often" or "always" provided specific dose recommendations. Online learning/training modules were the most preferred future training mode, with 88 (84%) physicians "likely" or "very likely" to participate. The top 3 desired topics for future training were marijuana-drug interactions (n = 84, 72%), management of specific medical conditions or symptoms (n = 83, 72%), and strategies to reduce opioids or other drugs use (n = 78, 67%).

CONCLUSIONS

This survey of over 100 medical marijuana physicians indicates that their clinical practices rely on a blend of research and anecdotal information sources. While physicians report clinical factors as influential during patient recommendation, patient assessment practices and treatment regimen recommendations vary substantially and rely on experimental approaches. More research is needed to inform evidence-based practice and training, especially considering details on drug interactions, risk-benefit of treatment for specific clinical conditions, and strategies to reduce opioid use.

The Attitudes and Beliefs of Family Physicians Regarding the Use of Medical Cannabis, Knowledge of Side Effects, and Barriers to Use: A Comparison Between Residents and Specialists

BACKGROUND

Israel has a regulated system with clearly defined indications for treatment with medical cannabis.

STUDY QUESTION

The main question was whether family physicians in southern Israel face barriers/knowledge gaps in prescribing cannabis for medical indications. The secondary question was whether there was a difference between residents and specialists in family medicine.

STUDY DESIGN

A questionnaire-based cross-sectional study.

MEASURES AND OUTCOMES

Attitudes of the participating physicians on the use of medical cannabis; comparison of attitudes of specialists in family medicine and residents on the use of medical cannabis.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-two family physicians participated in the study including 48 residents. More than 78% supported the use of medical cannabis and about 63% supported it's legalization. About 84% of the physicians believed that medical cannabis helped cancer patients and 82% believed it helped in the chronic pain. Only 28.3% believed that family physicians should recommend the use of medical cannabis. The physicians were well aware of the psychiatric (82%) and the neurological (78%) adverse effects of medical cannabis. Most (68%) were not willing to prescribe medical cannabis. No socio-demographic characteristic was associated with willingness to prescribe cannabis. About 95% of the physicians believed that the main barrier to recommending treatment was its potential for abuse, 66% percent-the danger that it would leak to the general public. About 60% of the specialists were not prepared to undergoing training in the prescription of medical cannabis compared with 31% of the residents (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Family physicians are concerned about recommending medical cannabis. It is encouraging that residents are motivated to undergo training to prescribe medical cannabis. There remain medical indications and adverse effects that family physicians are less aware of. Further studies should focus on effective ways to improve the level of physicians' knowledge on the issue.

Gender Differences in Medical Cannabis Use: Symptoms Treated, Physician Support for Use, and Prescription Medication Discontinuation

Background: Medical cannabis (MC) utilization continues to expand in the United States, as a growing body of evidence supports the use of cannabis and cannabinoids in the treatment of a range of chronic conditions. To date, gender-related differences in MC use are not widely reported, and little is known regarding physicians' support of patients' use of MC to address symptoms associated with chronic conditions. Materials and Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of MC users in Illinois (n = 361). We summarized participants' qualifying conditions, symptoms treated with MC, perceived physician support for MC use, use of MC and prescription medications, then analyzed differences by participant gender. Results: Bivariate analyses indicate that men report higher levels of support for MC use from both specialist and primary care physicians. Women were significantly more likely to increase use of cannabis after acquiring an MC card, and to discontinue prescription medications through MC use. Multivariable analyses indicate that being a woman, using MC to treat multiple symptoms, and reporting higher levels of support for MC use from a primary care provider significantly increased the likelihood of discontinuing prescription medication through MC use. Discussion: Women are more likely to report decreased use of prescription medications to treat symptoms, and report lower levels of support from physicians for MC use. Future research on gender differences in this population may benefit from more detailed data related to symptomology, utilization, dosing, and outcomes associated with MC, and interactions with the health care system to extend these findings.

A content analysis of internet information sources on medical cannabis

BACKGROUND

Medical cannabis users report that their knowledge regarding cannabis is predominantly from their own personal experiences and the Internet.

OBJECTIVE

We summarize and describe information found through Internet searches on medical cannabis in English language websites.

METHODS

We used terms related to medical cannabis in the Google search engine between November and December 2019. Resulting websites were catalogued and coded for content, including mentions of health and medical conditions, pharmacology, dosage, harmful or adverse effects, harm reduction techniques, cautions or warnings, products for sale, and credentials.

RESULTS

We coded 344 web pages on 179 unique websites. Cannabis was mentioned for the treatment of 151 different medical and health conditions, only four of the twenty most frequently mentioned conditions have received substantial empirical support for cannabis or cannabinoid treatment. Information content varied widely across sites, only a small proportion of sites included information on pharmacology, dosage, risks, and other aspects that are requirements for pharmaceutical drugs. Information provided was only moderately related to conclusions in the emerging scientific literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the rise in cannabis use within the U.S. and the reliance on the Internet as a source of information, considerable efforts are needed to provide accurate on-line cannabis education to minimize harms and maximize benefits for individuals and society.

Attitudes and knowledge about cannabis and cannabis-based therapies among US neurologists, nurses, and pharmacists

Use of cannabinoid therapies is on the rise in the United States, but responses of healthcare professionals and their knowledge of these therapies have been mixed. More information is needed about factors associated with healthcare professionals' attitudes and knowledge about medical cannabis. We conducted an online survey of US-based neurologists, nurse practitioners (NPs)/nurses, and pharmacists in August-September of 2018 (n = 451). We constructed perceived knowledge and attitudes scales and a knowledge index from multiple items and assessed state cannabis laws, participant's sociodemographics, workplace type and policies, and patient population. We used ordinary least-squares regression to examine associations among study variables. Over 80% of participants supported use and legalization of medical cannabis, especially cannabidiol (CBD) for epilepsy and when prescribed by a medical provider, but 40-50% (depending on item) felt unfamiliar with cannabinoid pharmacology and clinical applications. A total of 43% favored legal recreational cannabis. Pharmacists scored higher on the knowledge test than neurologists and NPs/nurses, but NPs/nurses had more favorable attitudes than neurologists and higher perceived knowledge than pharmacists. Both knowledge indicators predicted attitudes. State cannabis access and favorable workplace policies were associated with higher knowledge and more favorable attitudes. Healthcare professionals see potential in cannabis therapies but report significant knowledge gaps. Professional cannabinoid education is needed to address growing patient and provider demand for knowledge about cannabinoid therapies.

Knowledge, Practices, and Attitudes of Washington State Health Care Professionals Regarding Medical Cannabis

Introduction: Health care providers in Washington State practice in a unique environment where both medical and recreational cannabis use are legal. Five types of health care providers can authorize medical cannabis. State-certified medical cannabis consultants may advise patients in a cannabis retail store regarding use and consumption. Washington State's health care professionals' perspectives about medical cannabis can inform policy-makers nationwide who are navigating challenges posed by legalization of medical and recreational cannabis. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional mixed-mode survey using a 26-item questionnaire was administered to a random sample of actively licensed health care professionals legally permitted to provide medical cannabis authorizations in Washington State. We describe participant demographics and summarize responses to survey questions. We report comparisons across provider types using Fisher's exact tests with a level of significance of p<0.01. Results: Among the 1440 health care professionals invited to participate in the study, 310 respondents met eligibility criteria (response rate 24%). Only 57 respondents (18.4%) indicated having ever issued a medical cannabis authorization. Among them, 6, all naturopaths, had provided more than 500. Over half (58%) reported that they did not feel they had the knowledge and skills necessary to provide authorizations. Depending on the condition, 29-93% of respondents correctly identified conditions that qualified a patient to receive a medical cannabis authorization. Very few knew that employers are not required to provide accommodations for medical cannabis. Health care professionals (64.8%) served as the most frequent source of information regarding cannabis risks and benefits. Over half (62%) strongly or somewhat agreed that the Drug Enforcement Agency should reschedule cannabis to make it legal at the federal level. Conclusion: A wide range of knowledge was exhibited within our sample of health care professionals regarding qualifying conditions for medical cannabis. As more states adopt comprehensive medical cannabis laws, health care professionals must be prepared to provide information to patients regarding the effects, risks, and benefits of cannabis. Standardized education could ensure that health care professionals are prepared to responsibly promote the use of cannabis when indicated for medically appropriate symptoms and conditions. A rational approach to medical cannabis is needed to assure that unforeseen consequences are mitigated.

Ohio physician attitudes toward medical Cannabis and Ohio's medical marijuana program

Background

Ohio’s medical cannabis program is one of three states that require physicians to become certified to recommend medical cannabis to their patients. The current study examines the attitudes of Ohio physicians toward medical cannabis and Ohio’s program to ascertain how likely physicians are to participate in Ohio’s program.

Methods

Physicians were invited to complete an internet survey that asked them about their concerns regarding medical marijuana, Ohio’s program, their likelihood of recommending medical cannabis, and becoming certified within the state. Ordinal and logistic regressions were used to understand the physicians’ likelihood of recommending cannabis, of becoming certified to recommend cannabis, and their attitude toward Ohio’s program.

Results

In total, 11,665 physicians licensed to practice in Ohio were contacted by email, and 344 responses were received for a response rate of 2.9%. Only 42 physicians reported being certified or had plans to become certified to recommend marijuana, and 62% were unlikely to recommend marijuana to their patients. Overall, the belief that medical cannabis should be legal had the greatest association with the likelihood of recommending cannabis (OR = .37, 95% CI = .24–.54), of becoming certified (OR = .21, 95% CI = .10–.38), and believing that Ohio’s program is too strict (OR = .39, 95% CI = .30–.51). However, the study sample precludes generalizing the results beyond this study. The 2.9% response rate could indicate a bias toward physicians who have strong opinions about the legality of medical cannabis.

Conclusion

The results show that many physicians have concerns about medical cannabis and Ohio’s program, and many physicians may not participate in the program. This could be a problem for patients who would like to use cannabis for medical reasons; therefore, these patients, may need to utilize one physician for cannabis and another for regular care. Physicians will likely be caring for patients who are using cannabis regardless of their own beliefs about it. The lack of training regarding cannabis in healthcare, along with requiring “certified recommenders” to have training could result in a fractured healthcare system.

The distribution of Ohio's Certificates to Recommend: who will "prescribe" medical marijuana?

BACKGROUND

Under Ohio Medical Marijuana Control Program rules, Ohio physicians that recommend medical marijuana (MMJ) to patients must possess a Certificate to Recommend (CTR) from the State Medical Board. Although a pre-program state survey indicated that more than a quarter of Ohio physicians were likely to recommend MMJ, only 473 physicians obtained CTRs in the first year of the program, amounting to just 1.39% of the physician workforce. The purpose of this study is to evaluate demographic factors that influence a physician's decision to obtain the CTR.

METHOD

Using physician demographic data extracted from Ohio's databases of medical licensees and CTR holders, as well as the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile, prevalence ratios for CTR holders were calculated for specialty, medical degree (Doctor of Medicine, MD, vs. Doctor of Osteopathy, DO), age and gender. A multivariate model was implemented to generate adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) reflecting the independent effects of specialty, degree, and age. To assess temporal variations in CTR acquisition, per-specialty CTR counts were also plotted as a function of program month.

RESULTS

The best-represented specialties among CTR holders were Family Medicine (29.11%), Internal Medicine and its subspecialties (22.57%), and Anesthesiology (9.07%). Expressed as an adjusted per-specialty prevalence ratio in reference to Family Medicine, the dominant specialty was Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (aPR 2.08, 95% CI 1.34-3.24), with the lowest measurable prevalence ratios found in Pediatrics (aPR 0.17, 95% CI 0.10-0.30) and Surgery (aPR 0.33, 95% CI 0.22-0.50). DOs were more likely to obtain CTRs than MDs (aPR 1.72, 95% CI 1.39-2.15). The mean age of CTR holders was 54.03 +/- 11.43, vs. 51.13 +/- 13.38 for non-CTR holders (p < .0001). Although gender could not be included in the multivariate model, males were more likely than females to obtain a CTR (PR 1.54, 95%CI 1.26-1.89). A plot of per-month CTR acquisition by specialty demonstrated a fairly consistent specialty distribution of CTRs in the first year, as well as variations in overall CTR acquisition that may correspond to program-operational events.

CONCLUSION

Specialty, type of medical degree, and age all correlate independently with the likelihood of registering to recommend medical marijuana in Ohio. Specialty distribution of CTRs remained fairly consistent in the program's first year, although overall CTR acquisition may be sensitive to program-operational events such as delays in dispensary opening or product availability.

Cannabis Enthusiasts’ Knowledge of Medical Treatment Effectiveness and Increased Risks From Cannabis Use

Purpose:

To compare cannabis enthusiasts’ knowledge about cannabis risks and effectiveness in treating medical conditions with existing empirical evidence.

Design:

A brief survey assessed cannabis use, information sources, and knowledge about risks and effectiveness.

Setting:

A cannabis advocacy event in April 2019 in a state with legal medical and recreational cannabis.

Participants:

Demographically diverse adults (N = 472) who frequently used cannabis; 85% used cannabis for health or medical purposes.

Measures:

Participants reported the sources of their cannabis information, health conditions they thought cannabis was effective in treating (n = 10), and health risks increased by cannabis (n = 6). Conditions and risks were based on ratings of evidence (ie, from substantial to insufficient) for therapeutic effects and risks identified in a review by The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM, 2017).

Analyses:

Chi-square tests examined the correspondence between participants’ knowledge and NASEM conclusions.

Results:

Most participants’ (95% confidence interval [CI]: 74%-81%) knowledge of cannabis was from their own experiences; 18% (95% CI: 14%-21%) received information from primary care providers. On average, participants’ beliefs matched NASEM conclusions for half of effectiveness (95% CI: 50%-53%) and risk items (95% CI: 55%-57%). Many (95% CI: 38%-42%) thought that cannabis use did not increase any risk. Contrary to NASEM conclusions, many thought cannabis was effective in treating cancer (76%), depressive symptoms (72%), and epilepsy (68%). Those who received cannabis information from their primary care providers had better knowledge of medical effectiveness. Medicinal cannabis use frequency inversely predicted knowledge of medical effectiveness and increased risks of adverse events.

Conclusion:

There were considerable discrepancies between cannabis users’ knowledge and available evidence, highlighting the need for more research and education (by physicians, caregivers, and dispensaries) on effectiveness and health risks, especially for users with specific health issues such as pregnant women and people with depression.

Medical Cannabis Use in Glioma Patients Treated at a Comprehensive Cancer Center in Florida

Background: Glioma is a devastating primary tumor of the central nervous system with difficult-to-manage symptoms. Cannabis products have been postulated to potentially benefit glioma patients. Recent state legalization allowed investigators an opportunity to study glioma patients' adoption of medical marijuana (MM). Objective: Our goals were to: (1) determine the prevalence of marijuana use, both through physician recommendation and self-medication, and (2) evaluate its perceived risks and benefits in glioma patients. Design: Self-report data were collected and descriptive analyses were conducted. Setting/Subjects: Participants were adult, English-speaking patients undergoing treatment for primary non-recurrent malignant glioma in neuro-oncology clinics at an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. Measurements: The survey on MM was adapted from previous research and included questions on knowledge and attitudes toward MM; use, frequency, type, and sourcing of MM; and reasons for use of MM and perceived symptom relief among users. Results: A total of 73 patients were surveyed. The majority of participants were aware that MM was legal in the state, and most reported learning of this through the media. Over 70% of participants reported having considered using MM, and a third reported using marijuana products after their diagnosis. Most received recommendations from friends/family rather than a medical provider, and only half of the users had obtained a physician's recommendation. Users generally reported benefits. Conclusions: With the increasing national conversation that accompanies legalization, glioma patients are pursuing marijuana for the treatment for their symptoms. More research and education is needed to bring health care providers into the conversation.