Assessing Health Care Providers' Knowledge of Medical Cannabis

The Use of Compounds Derived from Cannabis sativa in the Treatment of Epilepsy, Painful Conditions, and Neuropsychiatric and Neurodegenerative Disorders

Neurological disorders present a wide range of symptoms and challenges in diagnosis and treatment. Cannabis sativa, with its diverse chemical composition, offers potential therapeutic benefits due to its anticonvulsive, analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and neuroprotective properties. Beyond cannabinoids, cannabis contains terpenes and polyphenols, which synergistically enhance its pharmacological effects. Various administration routes, including vaporization, oral ingestion, sublingual, and rectal, provide flexibility in treatment delivery. This review shows the therapeutic efficacy of cannabis in managing neurological disorders such as epilepsy, neurodegenerative diseases, neurodevelopmental disorders, psychiatric disorders, and painful pathologies. Drawing from surveys, patient studies, and clinical trials, it highlights the potential of cannabis in alleviating symptoms, slowing disease progression, and improving overall quality of life for patients. Understanding the diverse therapeutic mechanisms of cannabis can open up possibilities for using this plant for individual patient needs.

Patients' knowledge about the uses, risks, and beliefs surrounding the regulation and safety of Cannabis sativa L. in Peru

In recent decades, there has been a significant rise in the utilization of medical cannabis. Understanding the various facets surrounding its usage and regulation is paramount for patients, health professionals, and policymakers. This cross-sectional study conducted at the CANNAVITAL clinic in Lima, Peru aimed to assess the basic knowledge, attitudes towards use, and beliefs regarding regulation and safety of Cannabis sativa L. Among 86 patients (mean age: 41 ± 7.8 years; 53.4% women) actively receiving medical cannabis treatment for at least one year, we utilized the 22-item KUC-22 questionnaire to evaluate their understanding of cannabis, risk factors, legislation, medical and recreational use. The average duration of medical cannabis use was 3 ± 1.2 years. Results showed that 60.2% of patients were familiar with different forms of cannabis consumption, while 77.3% recognized the importance of product quality. Chronic pain, nausea and vomiting (each 23.9%) were the primary conditions treated with cannabis, followed by cancer and epilepsy (both 21.6%). A significant correlation was found between knowledge and cannabis use (p < 0.001). Furthermore, 92% of patients believed that a medical prescription was necessary, while 84.1% engaged in self-medication practices. Concerning perceptions, 69.3% of participants perceived psychological dependence from long-term cannabis use, and 65.9% believed it could cause health damage. Significant correlations were observed between the perception of risk factors, knowledge of legislation, and cannabis use (p < 0.001). In conclusion, Peruvian patients exhibited a high level of knowledge regarding the risks, uses, and regulatory framework surrounding Cannabis sativa L. These findings provide valuable insights into patients' perspectives on medical cannabis, offering important information for medical providers and researchers aiming to enhance cannabinoid-based therapies.

Planting the seeds for success: A qualitative study exploring primary healthcare providers' perceptions about medical cannabis

BACKGROUND

In Canada, cannabis legalization altered the way that the public can access cannabis for medical purposes. However, Canadians still struggle with finding healthcare professionals (HCPs) who are involved in medical cannabis counselling and authorization. This raises questions about the barriers that are causing this breakdown in care. Our study explored the perceptions of primary care providers regarding cannabis in their practice.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted by Zoom with HCPs in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) to discuss their experiences with medical and non-medical cannabis in practice. Family physicians and nurse practitioners who were practicing in primary care in NL were included. The interview guide and coding template were developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). A thematic analysis across the TDF was then conducted.

RESULTS

Twelve participants with diverse demographic backgrounds and experience levels were interviewed. Five main themes emerged including, knowledge acquisition, internal influences, patient influences, external HCP influences, and systemic influences. The TDF domain resulting in the greatest representation of codes was environmental context and resources.

INTERPRETATION

The findings suggested that HCPs have significant knowledge gaps in authorizing medical cannabis, which limited their practice competence and confidence in this area. Referring patients to cannabis clinics, while enforcing harm-reduction strategies, was an interim option for patients to access cannabis for medical purposes. However, developing practice guidelines and educational resources were suggested as prominent facilitators to promote medical cannabis authorization within the healthcare system.

Knowledge and Attitudes of Cannabidiol in Croatia among Students, Physicians, and Pharmacists

Due to cannabidiol's health benefits and absence of serious side effects, its use is constantly growing. This is a survey-based cross-sectional study that was conducted to determine Croatian pharmacists', physicians', and students' knowledge and attitudes about cannabidiol (CBD). Two questionnaires were created, one for students and the other for physicians and pharmacists. Our participants (in total 874: 473 students and 401 physicians and pharmacists) generally had positive attitudes towards CBD therapy as approximately 60% of them believe that CBD treatment is generally efficacious. Participants had positive attitudes toward the therapeutic value of CBD, especially pharmacists and pharmacy students (63.8% and 72.2%, respectively). Pharmacists were significantly more convinced that CBD could reduce the use of opioids prescribed for chronic pain (p < 0.05). Only 17.5% of students had read scientific papers about CBD, compared to a significantly higher percentage of physicians and pharmacists (43.0% and 47.8%, respectively) (p < 0.05). This study revealed a gap in knowledge regarding CBD, since 89.3% of pharmacists and physicians, as well as 84.8% of students, believe they need more education about CBD. We conclude that it is important to improve the educational curricula so that medical professionals can recommend CBD use to their patients when needed.

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.

Medicinal Cannabis Use for Rheumatic Conditions in the US Versus Canada: Rationale for Use and Patient-Health Care Provider Interactions

OBJECTIVE

Understanding how medical cannabis (MC) use is integrated into medical practice for rheumatic disease management is essential. We characterized rationale for MC use, patient-physician interactions around MC, and MC use patterns among people with rheumatic conditions in the US and Canada.

METHODS

We surveyed 3406 participants with rheumatic conditions in the US and Canada, with 1727 completing the survey (50.7% response rate). We assessed disclosure of MC use to health care providers, MC authorization by health care providers, and MC use patterns and investigated factors associated with MC disclosure to health care providers in the US versus Canada.

RESULTS

Overall, 54.9% of US respondents and 78.0% of Canadians reported past or current MC use, typically because of inadequate symptom relief from other medications. Compared to those in Canada, fewer US participants obtained MC licenses, disclosed MC use to their health care providers, or asked advice on how to use MC (all P values <0.001). Overall, 47.4% of Canadian versus 28.2% of US participants rated their medical professionals as their most trusted information source. MC legality in state of residence was associated with 2.49 greater odds of disclosing MC use to health care providers (95% confidence interval: 1.49-4.16, P < 0.001) in the US, whereas there were no factors associated with MC disclosure in Canada. Our study is limited by our convenience sampling strategy and cross-sectional design.

CONCLUSION

Despite widespread availability, MC is poorly integrated into rheumatic disease care, with most patients self-directing use with minimal or no clinical oversight. Concerted efforts to integrate MC into education and clinical policy is critical.

Adult Cannabis Use: An Exploratory Case Study

Cannabis use is on the rise among adults and older adults managing chronic health conditions in the United States. There is limited understanding of this trend and the factors influencing cannabis use in the health care community. The current study explores the perceptions and experiences of adults and older adults with chronic health conditions who use cannabis regularly. Case study data were gathered through interviews guided by the Biopsychosocial Model. Biological, psychological, and social reasons for cannabis use emerged in the interviews. Despite reporting adverse events, cannabis was reported as an effective treatment for participants' chronic health issues, and participants were more comfortable with its use compared to prescription medications. A feeling of autonomy contributed to cannabis use being perceived as positive. Cannabis use is rising in the United States. Primary care providers must regularly screen older adults to identify appropriate and inappropriate use patterns. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 49(8), 19-26.].

International perspective on physician knowledge, attitude and practices related to medical cannabis

Background

The trends of recreational use of cannabis and use of cannabis for medical indications (i.e. "medical cannabis") have grown in recent years. Despite that, there is still limited scientific evidence to guide clinical decision-making and the strength of evidence for the medical use of cannabis is currently considered to be low. In contrast, there's growing evidence for negative health outcomes related to use of cannabis. In this rapidly shifting landscape, the role of physician's attitudes regarding the therapeutic value of cannabis has become essential. This study aimed to characterize knowledge/experience, attitudes, and potential predictors of clinical practice regarding medical cannabis.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of physicians from 17 countries between 2016-2018. The survey comprised of 28 questions designed to explore physician knowledge, attitude, and practices regarding the use of medical cannabis. Descriptive statistics were used to examine willingness to recommend medical cannabis for medical and psychiatric indications, followed by regression analysis to identify predictors of physician willingness to recommend medical cannabis.

Results

A total of 323 physicians responded to the survey. Mean age was 35.4± 9.5 years, with 10.04 ±8.6 years of clinical experience. 53 percent of physicians were women. Clinical experience with medical cannabis was overall limited (51.4% noted never having recommended medical cannabis; 33% noted inadequate knowledge regarding medical cannabis). Overall willingness to recommend medical cannabis was highest for chemotherapy-induced nausea, refractory chronic neuropathic pain, and spasticity in amyotropic lateral sclerosis (ALS).

Conclusion

This international study examining knowledge, attitudes and practices related to medical cannabis among physicians revealed that there are significant gaps in domain-specific knowledge related to medical cannabis. There is wide variability in willingness to recommend medical cannabis that is not consistent with the current strength of evidence. This study thus highlights the need for greater education related to domain-specific knowledge about medical cannabis.

Cannabinoid Therapy: Attitudes and Experiences of People With Chronic Pain

OBJECTIVE

Clinical trials of cannabinoids for chronic pain have mixed and often inconclusive results. In contrast, many prospective observational studies show the analgesic effects of cannabinoids. This survey study aimed to examine the experiences/attitudes of individuals with chronic pain who are currently taking, have previously taken, or never taken cannabinoids for chronic pain to inform future research.

METHODS

This study is based on a cross-sectional, web-based survey of individuals with self-reported chronic pain. Participants were invited to participate through an email that was distributed to the listservs of patient advocacy groups and foundations that engage individuals with chronic pain.

RESULTS

Of the 969 respondents, 444 (46%) respondents reported currently taking, 213 (22%) previously taken, and 312 (32%) never taken cannabinoids for pain. Participants reported using cannabinoids to treat a wide variety of chronic pain conditions. Those currently taking cannabinoids (vs previously) more frequently reported: (1) large improvements from cannabinoids in all pain types, including particularly difficult-to-treat chronic overlapping pain conditions (eg, pelvic pain), (2) improvements in comorbid symptoms (eg, sleep), and (3) lower interference from side effects. Those currently taking cannabinoids reported more frequent and satisfactory communication with clinicians regarding cannabinoid use. Those never taken cannabinoids reported a lack of suggestion/approval of a clinician (40%), illegality (25%), and lack of FDA regulation (19%) as reasons for never trying cannabinoids.

CONCLUSION

These findings underscore the importance of conducting high-quality clinical trials that include diverse pain populations and clinically relevant outcomes that if successful, could support FDA approval of cannabinoid products. Clinicians could then prescribe and monitor these treatments similarly to other chronic pain medications.

Let's Match: Making Cannabis Policy Guided by Research

PURPOSE

The growth and increasing sophistication of the legal cannabis industry necessitates further scientific inquiry to establish an evidence-based policy path forward. However, policymakers must balance public demand for cannabis reform with the lack of scientific consensus on key issues. This Commentary discusses Massachusetts' statutory provisions supporting cannabis research, advances in social equity driven by data, and critical policy issues, which invite questions without clear scientific answers.

FINDINGS

Although the full breadth of inquiry needed cannot possibly be contained in a single article, this Commentary poses questions in 2 pertinent issue areas that affect adult and medical use. First, we discuss the current limitations on determining the scope and severity of cannabis-impaired driving and detecting impairment at any one point in time. Although experimental studies have found varying levels of impairment on driving ability, observational data have been inconclusive regarding the extent of traffic incidents involving cannabis impairment. A precise threshold for impairment and manner of detection must be established to develop just enforcement measures. Second, we discuss the lack of clinical standardization in medical cannabis use. In the absence of a consistent clinical framework, medical cannabis patients face undue burdens that limit access to treatment. A more well-defined clinical structure is needed to enhance use of and access to therapeutic cannabis treatment models.

IMPLICATIONS

Cannabis policy reform has gone forward at the will of voters despite the status of cannabis as a Schedule I controlled substance at the federal level, which has limited opportunities to research cannabis because it is commercially available. The implication of such limitations is realized by states leading cannabis reform, where unanswered questions present an opportunity for the scientific community to inform an evidence-based path forward in cannabis policy.

Medicinal Cannabis Guidance and Resources for Health Professionals to Inform Clinical Decision Making

PURPOSE

Interest in the use of cannabis as a medicine has markedly increased during the last decade, with an unprecedented number of patients now seeking advice or prescriptions for medicinal cannabis. Unlike other medicines prescribed by physicians, many medicinal cannabis products have not undergone standard clinical trial development required by regulatory authorities. Different formulations with varying strengths and ratios of tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol are available, and this diversity of medicinal cannabis products available for a myriad of therapeutic indications adds to the complexity. Physicians face challenges and barriers in their clinical decision making with medicinal cannabis because of current evidence limitations. Research efforts to address evidence limitations are ongoing; in the interim, educational resources and clinical guidance are being developed to address the gap in clinical information and support the needs of health professionals.

METHODS

This article provides an overview of various resources that health professionals may use when seeking information about medicinal cannabis in the absence of high-quality evidence and clinical guidelines. It also identifies examples of international evidence-based resources that support clinical decision making with medicinal cannabis.

FINDINGS

Similarities and differences between international examples of guidance and guideline documents are identified and summarized.

IMPLICATIONS

Guidance can help guide physicians in the individualized choice and dose of medicinal cannabis. Before quality clinical trials and regulator-approved products with risk management programs, safety data require clinical and academic collaborative pharmacovigilance.

Medical cannabis in schools: The experiences of caregivers

Objectives

Implementing medical cannabis (MC) into a child's daily routine can be challenging and there is a lack of guidance for its therapeutic use in schools in Canada. Our objective was to learn about the experiences of caregivers of school-aged children who require MC.

Methods

Qualitative description was used and caregivers were interviewed about MC in schools and in general. The transcripts were entered into Dedoose software for qualitative analysis and content analysis was performed. Sentences and statements were ascribed line by line into meaning units and labelled with codes, and organized according to categories and subcategories.

Results

Twelve caregivers of school-aged children who take MC participated. The most common reasons for treatment were drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE), autism, or other developmental disorders. Approximately half of the participants' children (n = 6) took MC during the school day and most (5/6) perceived their experiences to be positive or neutral but reported a lack of knowledge about MC. While data saturation was not reached regarding MC in schools, rich dialogues were garnered about MC in general and three categories were identified: challenges (subcategories stigma, finding an authorizer, cost, dosing, and supply); parents as advocates (subcategories required knowledge, attitudes, skills, and sources of information); and caregiver relief for positive outcomes.

Conclusions

Caregivers demonstrate remarkable tenacity despite the many challenges associated with MC use. Education and practice change are needed to ensure that children using MC can benefit from or continue to experience its positive outcomes within the school environment and beyond.

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.

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.

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.