Reduction of Benzodiazepine Use in Patients Prescribed Medical Cannabis

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

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

Factors Associated with Medical Cannabis Use After Certification: A Three-Month Longitudinal Study

Background: Over the past decade, there has been increased utilization of medical cannabis (MC) in the United States. Few studies have described sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with MC use after certification and more specifically, factors associated with use of MC products with different cannabinoid profiles. Methods: We conducted a longitudinal cohort study of adults (N=225) with chronic or severe pain on opioids who were newly certified for MC in New York State and enrolled in the study between November 2018 and January 2022. We collected data over participants' first 3 months in the study, from web-based assessment of MC use every 2 weeks (unit of analysis). We used generalized estimating equation models to examine associations of sociodemographic and clinical factors with (1) MC use (vs. no MC use) and (2) use of MC products with different cannabinoid profiles. Results: On average, 29% of the participants used predominantly high delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) MC products within the first 3 months of follow-up, 30% used other MC products, and 41% did not use MC products. Non-Hispanic White race, pain at multiple sites, and past 30-day sedative use were associated with a higher likelihood of MC use (vs. no MC use). Current tobacco use, unregulated cannabis use, and enrollment in the study during the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with a lower likelihood of MC use (vs. no MC use). Among participants reporting MC use, female gender and older age were associated with a lower likelihood of using predominantly high-THC MC products (vs. other MC products). Conclusion: White individuals were more likely to use MC after certification, which may be owing to access and cost issues. The findings that sedative use was associated with greater MC use, but tobacco and unregulated cannabis were associated with less MC use, may imply synergism and substitution that warrant further research. From the policy perspective, additional measures are needed to ensure equitable availability of and access to MC. Health practitioners should check patients' history and current use of sedative, tobacco, and unregulated cannabis before providing an MC recommendation and counsel patients on safe cannabis use. clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03268551).

Benzodiazepine use in medical cannabis authorization adult patients from 2013 to 2021: Alberta, Canada

BACKGROUND

Benzodiazepines are a class of medications that are being frequently prescribed in Canada but carry significant risk of harm. There has been increasing clinical interest on the potential "sparing effects" of medical cannabis as one strategy to reduce benzodiazepine use. The objective of this study as to examine the association of medical cannabis authorization with benzodiazepine usage between 2013 and 2021 in Alberta, Canada.

METHODS

A propensity score matched cohort study with patients on regular benzodiazepine treatment authorized to use medical cannabis compared to controls who do not have authorization for medical cannabis. A total of 9690 medically authorized cannabis patients were matched to controls. To assess the effect of medical cannabis use on daily average diazepam equivalence (DDE), interrupted time series (ITS) analysis was used to assess the change in the trend of DDE in the 12 months before and 12 months after the authorization of medical cannabis.

RESULTS

Over the follow-up period after medical cannabis authorization, there was no overall change in the DDE use in authorized medical cannabis patients compared to matched controls (- 0.08 DDE, 95% CI: - 0.41 to 0.24). Likewise, the sensitivity analysis showed that, among patients consuming ≤5 mg baseline DDE, there was no change immediately after medical cannabis authorization compared to controls (level change, - 0.04 DDE, 95% CI: - 0.12 to 0.03) per patient as well as in the month-to-month trend change (0.002 DDE, 95% CI: - 0.009 to 0.12) per patient was noted.

CONCLUSIONS

This short-term study found that medical cannabis authorization had minimal effects on benzodiazepine use. Our findings may contribute ongoing evidence for clinicians regarding the potential impact of medical cannabis to reduce benzodiazepine use.

HIGHLIGHTS

• Medical cannabis authorization had little to no effect on benzodiazepine usage among patients prescribed regular benzodiazepine treatment in Alberta, Canada. • Further clinical research is needed to investigate the potential impact of medical cannabis as an alternative to benzodiazepine medication.

Examining the use of cannabidiol and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol-based medicine among individuals diagnosed with dementia living within residential aged care facilities: Results of a double-blind randomised crossover trial

OBJECTIVE

Dementia affects individuals older than 65 years. Currently, residential aged care facilities (RACF) use psychotropic medications to manage behavioural and neuropsychiatric symptoms of dementia (BPSD), which are recommended for short-term use and have substantial side effects, including increased mortality. Cannabinoid-based medicines (CBM) have some benefits that inhibit BPSD and cause minimal adverse effects (AEs), yet limited research has been considered with this population. The study aimed to determine a tolerable CBM dose (3:2 delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol:cannabidiol), and assessed its effect on BPSD, quality of life (QoL) and perceived pain.

METHODS

An 18-week randomised, double-blinded, crossover trial was conducted. Four surveys, collected on seven occasions, were used to measure changes in BPSD, QoL and pain. Qualitative data helped to understand attitudes towards CBM. General linear mixed models were used in the analysis, and the qualitative data were synthesised.

RESULTS

Twenty-one participants (77% female participants, mean age 85) took part in the trial. No significant differences were seen between the placebo and CBM for behaviour, QOL or pain, except a decrease in agitation at the end of treatment in favour of CBM. The qualitative findings suggested improved relaxation and sleep among some individuals. Post hoc estimates on the data collected suggested that 50 cases would draw stronger conclusions on the Neuropsychiatric Inventory.

CONCLUSIONS

The study design was robust, rigorous and informed by RACF. The medication appeared safe, with minimal AEs experienced with CBM. Further studies incorporating larger samples when considering CBM would allow researchers to investigate the sensitivity of detecting BPSD changes within the complexity of the disease and concomitant with medications.

"The Drug Use Unfortunately isn't all Bad": Chronic Disease Self-Management Complexity and Strategy Among Marginalized People Who Use Drugs

Self-management programs improve health outcomes and self-management is recommended for chronic conditions. Yet chronic disease self-management supports have rarely been applied to people who use drugs (PWUD). Thus, our objective was to explore self-management experiences among marginalized PWUD. We used community-based participatory methods and conducted qualitative interviews. Participants self-identified as having long-term and past year experience using non-prescribed drugs, one other chronic condition, and socioeconomic marginalization. We analyzed the data using reflexive thematic analysis. Although many participants considered drug use a chronic health issue, self-medicating with non-prescribed drugs was also a key self-management strategy to address other health issues. Participants also described numerous other strategies, including cognitive and behavioral tactics. These findings highlight the need for a safe supply of pharmaceutical-grade drugs to support self-management among marginalized PWUD. Self-management supports should also be tailored to address relevant topics (e.g., harm reduction, withdrawal), include creative activities, and not hinder PWUD's agency.

Longitudinal Relationship between the Introduction of Medicinal Cannabis and Polypharmacy: An Australian Real-World Evidence Study

BACKGROUND

Recent studies recommend medicinal cannabis (MC) as a potential treatment for chronic pain (CP) when conventional therapies are not successful; however, data from Australia is limited. This real-world evidence study explored how the introduction of MC related to concomitant medication use over time. Long-term safety also was examined.

METHODS

Data were collected by the Emerald Clinics (a network of seven clinics located across Australia) as part of routine practice from Jan 2020 toJan 2021. Medications were classified by group: antidepressants, benzodiazepines, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, and total number of medications. Adverse events (AEs) were collected at each visit and subsequently coded using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities version 23 into the system organ class (SOC) and preferred term (PT). A total of 535 patients were analyzed.

RESULTS

The most common daily oral dose was 10 mg for delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and 15 mg for cannabidiol (CBD). With the introduction of MC, patients' total number of medications consumed decreased over the course of one year; significant reductions in NSAIDs, benzodiazepines, and antidepressants were observed (p < .001). However, the number of prescribed opioid medications did not differ from baseline to the end of one year (p = .49). Only 6% of patients discontinued MC treatment during the study. A total of 600 AEs were reported in 310 patients during the reporting period and 97% of them were classified as nonserious. Discussion. Though observational in nature, these findings suggest MC is generally well-tolerated, consistent with the previous literature, and may reduce concomitant use of some medications. Due to study limitations, concomitant medication reductions cannot be causally attributed to MC. Nevertheless, these data underscore early signals that warrant further exploration in randomized trials.

Association Between Prenatal Cannabis Use and Psychotropic Medication Use in Pregnant Patients With Depression and Anxiety

OBJECTIVES

This cross-sectional study examined associations between prenatal cannabis use and prescribed psychotropic medication use among pregnant patients with depression or anxiety in a large, integrated healthcare system.

METHODS

Study patients had a confirmed pregnancy and a depressive or anxiety disorder defined by International Classification of Diseases codes between 2012 and 2018 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Patients were screened for prenatal substance use via a self-reported questionnaire and urine toxicology test as part of standard prenatal care. Generalized estimating equation models tested for associations between prenatal cannabis use and any dispensation of antidepressants, benzodiazepines, and hypnotics during gestation. Models were stratified by diagnosis (depression or anxiety) and depression symptom severity.

RESULTS

This study included 35,047 pregnancies (32,278 patients; 17.6% aged <25 years, 48.1% non-Hispanic White). Adjusting for patient age, income, race/ethnicity, and depression symptom severity, the 12.6% of patients who screened positive for prenatal cannabis use demonstrated higher odds of prenatal benzodiazepine (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] = 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.20-1.62) and hypnotic (aOR = 1.28; 95% CI = 1.11-1.48), but not antidepressants (aOR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.96-1.14) use. This pattern persisted when diagnostic groups were examined separately. The odds of prenatal benzodiazepine and hypnotic use associated with prenatal cannabis use were higher among pregnancies with severe depression symptom severity (31.8% of the sample).

CONCLUSIONS

Among pregnant patients with depression or anxiety, prenatal cannabis use was associated with higher odds of prenatal benzodiazepine and hypnotic use. As patients may be using cannabis to address depression and anxiety, prescribers should remain vigilant for under- or untreated psychiatric symptoms among pregnant patients and provide evidence-based treatments.

Medication overuse headache in patients with chronic migraine using cannabis: A case-referent study

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether cannabis use predicts medication overuse headache (MOH) in patients with chronic migraine (CM).

METHODS

Electronic chart review was conducted by combining the terms "CM," "medication overuse," "cannabis," "cannabidiol," and "tetrahydrocannabinol" for patients seen at our headache clinics from 2015 to 2019. Of 729 charts consecutively screened, 368 met our inclusion criteria, that is, adult patients with CM with ≥1-year CM duration. The following variables were extracted from the included patient charts: MOH diagnosis, age, sex, migraine frequency, current CM duration, current cannabis use duration, overused acute migraine medications, current MOH duration, and types of cannabis products used. Logistic regression was used to identify variables predicting MOH while controlling for remaining predictors. Agglomerative hierarchical clustering (AHC) was conducted to explore natural clusters using all predictor variables.

RESULTS

There were 212 patients with CM and MOH (cases; median age 43 years, interquartile range [IQR] 33-54; 177 [83%] females) and 156 patients with CM without MOH (referents; median age 40 years, IQR 31-49; 130 [83%] females). MOH was present in 81% (122/150) of current cannabis users compared with 41% (90/218) in those without cannabis use-adjusted odds ratio 6.3 (95% CI: 3.56 to 11.1, p < 0.0001). Current cannabis use was significantly associated with opioid use (Spearman's rho 0.26, p < 0.0001). Both current cannabis use (rho 0.40, p < 0.0001) and opioid use (rho 0.36, p < 0.0001) were significantly associated with MOH. Similarly, AHC revealed two major natural clusters. Cluster I patients featured 9.3 times higher current cannabis use, 9.2 times higher current opioid use, and 1.8 times higher MOH burden than those in Cluster II (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Cannabis use was significantly associated with increased prevalence of MOH in CM. Bidirectional cannabis-opioid association was observed-use of one was associated with use of the other. Advising patients with CM and MOH to reduce cannabis use may help treat MOH effectively.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Medicinal cannabis and driving: the intersection of health and road safety policy

BACKGROUND

Recent shifting attitudes towards the medical use of cannabis has seen legal access pathways established in many jurisdictions in North America, Europe and Australasia. However, the positioning of cannabis as a legitimate medical product produces some tensions with other regulatory frameworks. A notable example of this is the so-called 'zero tolerance' drug driving legal frameworks, which criminalise the presence of THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) in a driver's bodily fluids irrespective of impairment. Here we undertake an analysis of this policy issue based on a case study of the introduction of medicinal cannabis in Australia.

METHODS

We examine the regulatory approaches used for managing road safety risks associated with potentially impairing prescription medicines and illicit drugs in Australian jurisdictions, as well as providing an overview of evidence relating to cannabis and road safety risk, unintended impacts of the 'zero-tolerance' approach on patients, and the regulation of medicinal cannabis and driving in comparable jurisdictions.

RESULTS

Road safety risks associated with medicinal cannabis appear similar or lower than numerous other potentially impairing prescription medications. The application of presence-based offences to medicinal cannabis patients appears to derive from the historical status of cannabis as a prohibited drug with no legitimate medical application. This approach is resulting in patient harms including criminal sanctions when not impaired and using the drug as directed by their doctor, or the forfeiting of car use and related mobility. Others who need to drive are excluded from accessing a needed medication and associated therapeutic benefit. 'Medical exemptions' for medicinal cannabis in comparable jurisdictions and other drugs included in presence offences in Australia (e.g. methadone) demonstrate a feasible alternative approach.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that in medical-only access models there is little evidence to justify the differential treatment of medicinal cannabis patients, compared with those taking other prescription medications with potentially impairing effects.

Opioid use in medical cannabis authorization adult patients from 2013 to 2018: Alberta, Canada

BACKGROUND

The opioid overdose epidemic in Canada and the United States has become a public health crisis - with exponential increases in opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Recently, there has been an increasing body of evidence focusing on the opioid-sparing effects of medical cannabis use (reduction of opioid use and reliance), and medical cannabis as a potential alternative treatment for chronic pain. The objective of this study is to assess the effect of medical cannabis authorization on opioid use (oral morphine equivalent; OME) between 2013 and 2018 in Alberta, Canada.

METHODS

All adult patients defined as chronic opioid users who were authorized medical cannabis by their health care provider in Alberta, Canada from 2013 to 2018 were propensity score matched to non-authorized chronic opioid using controls. A total of 5373 medical cannabis patients were matched to controls, who were all chronic opioid users. The change in the weekly average OME of opioid drugs for medical cannabis patients relative to controls was measured. Interrupted time series (ITS) analyses was used to assess the trend change in OME during the 26 weeks (6 months) before and 52 weeks (1 year) after the authorization of medical cannabis among adult chronic opioid users.

RESULTS

Average age was 52 years and 54% were female. Patients on low dose opioids (< 50 OME) had an increase in their weekly OME per week (absolute increase of 112.1 OME, 95% CI: 104.1 to 120.3); whereas higher dose users (OME > 100), showed a significant decrease over 6 months (- 435.5, 95% CI: - 596.8 to - 274.2) compared to controls.

CONCLUSIONS

This short-term study found that medical cannabis authorization showed intermediate effects on opioid use, which was dependent on initial opioid use. Greater observations of changes in OME appear to be in those patients who were on a high dosage of opioids (OME > 100); however, continued surveillance of patients utilizing both opioids and medical cannabis is warranted by clinicians to understand the long-term potential benefits and any harms of ongoing use.

Substance Use in Mild-COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Study

Background: There is a need for prospective studies investigating substance use variations in mild COVID-19 patients. These individuals represent the majority of patients affected by the disease and are routinely treated at home, facing periods of quarantine.

Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study. All people who tested positive for COVID-19 and classified as mild cases (i.e., no alarm sign/symptom, no need for in-person consultation) during the treatment in the public health system of a Brazilian city with around 160,000 inhabitants were monitored by phone for all the COVID-19 symptoms listed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) during the active phase of the disease (i.e., no longer experiencing symptoms, up to 14 days in mild cases). After this phase (median = 108 days after intake, IQR = 76–137), we asked these patients who were classified as experiencing mild COVID-19 (n = 993) about last-month substance use in three time-points: pre-COVID, just after COVID-19 acute phase (post-COVID acute phase) and in the period before survey (post-COVID follow-up phase).

Results: The number of COVID-19 symptoms was not associated with pre- or post-infection substance use. Pre-COVID alcohol and non-medical benzodiazepine use were associated with specific COVID-19 symptoms. However, sensitivity analyses showed that such associations could be explained by previous psychiatric and medical profiles. Alcohol and tobacco use decreased and non-medical analgesics increased in the post-COVID acute phase. However, just alcohol use remained lower in the post-COVID follow-up period. Higher pre-COVID levels of tobacco and alcohol were associated with post-COVID follow-up cannabis and non-medical analgesic use, respectively. Non-medical benzodiazepine use had positive and negative bi-directional associations with cannabis and non-medical analgesic use, respectively.

Conclusion: We were not able to find specific associations between substance use and COVID-19 symptomatology in the present study. Patients with mild COVID-19 should be monitored for substance use in the post-COVID-19 period, and preventive interventions for non-medical analgesic use should be implemented. Focused preventive interventions increasing the perceived risks of cannabis and non-medical benzodiazepine and analgesic use among people experiencing mild COVID-19 that reported previous substance use could be useful.

Safety Considerations in Cannabinoid-Based Medicine

Cannabinoids are a diverse class of chemical compounds that are increasingly recognized as potential therapeutic options for a range of conditions. While many studies and reviews of cannabinoids focus on efficacy, safety is much less well reported. Overall assessment of the safety of cannabinoid-based medicines is confounded by confusion with recreational cannabis use as well as different study designs, indications, dosing, and administration methods. However, clinical studies in registered products are increasingly available, and this article aims to discuss and clarify what is known regarding the safety profiles of cannabinoid-based medicines, focusing on the medical and clinical safety evidence and identifying areas for future research. The two most well-studied cannabinoids are Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), or its synthetic variants (dronabinol, nabilone), and cannabidiol (CBD). Across diverse indications, dizziness and fatigue are generally the most common adverse events experienced by patients receiving THC or combined THC and CBD. Patients receiving THC may experience adverse cognitive effects and impairment in psychomotor skills, with implications for driving and some occupations, while CBD may help to lower the psychotropic effects of THC when used in combination. Studies on dependency and addiction in a medical context are limited, but have shown inconsistent findings regarding misuse potential. Generally, the recommended route of administration is oral ingestion, as smoking medicinal cannabinoid products potentially releases mutagenic and carcinogenic by-products. There are several potential drug-drug interactions and contraindications for cannabinoid-based medicines, which physicians should account for when making prescribing decisions. The available evidence shows that, as with any other class of pharmaceuticals, cannabinoid-based medicines are associated with safety risks which should be assessed in the context of potential therapeutic benefits. Each patient should be assessed on an individual basis and physicians must rely on informed, evidence-based decision-making when determining whether a cannabinoid-based medicine could be an appropriate treatment option.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Use of cannabinoid-based medicine among older residential care recipients diagnosed with dementia: study protocol for a double-blind randomised crossover trial

BACKGROUND

Dementia is a neurological condition that affects the cognitive and functional ability of the brain and is the leading cause of disability among those aged 65 years and above. More effective ways to manage dementia symptoms are needed because current treatment options (antidepressants and antipsychotics) can be ineffective and are associated with substantial side effects, including increased rate of mortality. Cannabinoid-based medicine (CBM) has shown an ability to inhibit some symptoms associated with dementia, and the adverse effects are often minimal; yet, little research has explored the use of CBM among this population.

AIM

To monitor the safety of a purified dose of CBM oil (3:2 delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol:cannabidiol) on behaviour symptoms, quality of life and discomfort caused by pain.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will carry out an 18-week, randomised, double-blind crossover trial that consists of a 2-week eligibility period, two 6-week treatment cycles, and two 2-week washout periods (between both cycles and after the second treatment cycle). We aim to recruit 50 participants with dementia who are living in residential aged-care facilities. The participants will be randomised into two groups and will receive a dose of either CBM oil or placebo for the first treatment cycle and the opposite medication for the second. Data will be collected using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire, the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory, the Quality of Life in Alzheimer's Disease questionnaire, and the Abbey Pain Scale on seven occasions. These will be completed by the participants, aged-care staff, and nominated next of kin or family members. The participants' heart rate and blood pressure will be monitored weekly, and their body composition and weight will be monitored fortnightly by a research nurse, to assess individual dose response and frailty. In addition, pre- and post-surveys will be administered to aged-care staff and family members to understand their perceptions of CBM and to inform proposed focus groups consisting of the aged-care staff and next of kin.

DISCUSSION

The study design has been informed by medical professionals and key stakeholders, including those working in the residential aged-care industry to ensure patient safety, collection of non-invasive measures, and methodological rigor and study feasibility.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12619000474156. Registered on 21 March 2019.