Marijuana in the Workplace: Guidance for Occupational Health Professionals and Employers Joint Guidance Statement of the American Association of Occupational Health Nurses and the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Medicinal Cannabis and Implications for Workplace Health and Safety: Scoping Review of Systematic Reviews

PURPOSE

Although medicinal cannabis is prescribed for conditions such as pain, epilepsy, nausea and vomiting during cancer treatment, evidence about associated adverse side effects is still evolving. Because adverse events (AEs) might impact the performance of workers, it is important to consider their implications on workplace health and safety (WHS). This study aimed to map the types and prevalence of the AEs associated with medical cannabis and articulate how those events could impact WHS.

METHODS

A scoping review of systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses published between 2015 and March 2021 was performed to identify the AEs of medicinal cannabis in adults. Publications in English and full text available online were collected from Embase, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science.

RESULTS

Of 1,326 papers identified from the initial search, 31 met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. The studies reported various AEs with the most predominant being sedation, nausea/vomiting, dizziness, and euphoria. Acute and chronic pain was the most prevalent disorder under review.

CONCLUSIONS

Adverse events associated with the use of medicinal cannabis could increase workplace risks, including decreased alertness and reaction times, increased absenteeism, reduced ability to safely drive or operate machinery and an increased probability of falling. Focused research into the risk to workers and workplaces from the use of medical cannabis and related human performance impairment is urgently warranted.

Effort-Reward Imbalance at Work and Drug Misuse: Evidence from a National Survey in the U.S

With the rise of drug misuse among workers in recent years, preliminary research on potential risk factors in the workplace of single-type of drug misuse has been reported. This is the first study to examine cross-sectional associations of work stress, in terms of effort-reward imbalance, with multiple drug misuse (including any drug misuse, opioid misuse, sedatives misuse, cannabis misuse, and other drug misuse) during the past 12 months in a national sample of U.S. workers. Data of 2211 workers were derived from the nationally representative and population-based Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) study. Internal consistency reliability and factorial validity of a 17-item effort-reward imbalance measure were robust and satisfactory. After adjustment for relevant covariates, logistic regression analyses showed that workers experiencing effort-reward imbalance at work had significantly higher odds of any drug misuse (OR and 95% CI = 1.18 (1.03, 1.37)), especially opioid misuse (OR and 95% CI = 1.35 (1.07, 1.69)) and other drug misuse (OR and 95% CI = 1.36 (1.01, 1.83)). The findings suggest that a stressful work environment may act as a determinant of drug misuse, and further prospective evidence is needed.

A Call for Person-Centered Language and Consistent Terminology Regarding Cannabis Use

The increased availability of medical and recreational cannabis has facilitated a need for a change in health care practices. The language surrounding substance use disorders (SUDs) needs to be destigmatized. The necessity for utilizing "person-first" or "person-centered language" is fundamental to ensure that there is consistency among health care personnel for treating patients with an SUD and providing quality patient care. There also lies an enhanced need to more clearly define recreational cannabis use on a state versus federal level, in the workplace, and within higher education.

Abuse of Licit and Illicit Psychoactive Substances in the Workplace: Medical, Toxicological, and Forensic Aspects

About one-third of adult life is spent in the workplace. The use of psychoactive substances is a major preventable cause of morbidity and mortality. The consumption of psychoactive substances during or outside working hours greatly increases the frequency and severity of labor accidents, as well as the workers’ poor general state of health and productivity, implying higher costs for enterprises. It is the responsibility of organizations to ensure the safety and health of their workers. These cannot be limited to traditional routine clinical exams, as other aspects also have an impact on health. Thus, prevention and intervention in the consumption of psychoactive substances (e.g., ethanol, opioids, central nervous system stimulants or depressants, hallucinogens, Cannabis derivatives, dissociative substances, and inhalants) in labor activity should be considered as an investment of organizations and not as a cost, in view of the professional, personal, and family advantages for workers and employers, with a potential impact on productivity, security, health, and quality of life at work. Despite the extensive literature on the subject, each article generally focuses on one or another aspect of a very specific nature, not tackling the problem in a holistic way by confronting clinical, safety, and legal issues. This article presents a reflection on the legal, laboratorial, clinical, ethical, forensic, and safety concerns related to the consumption of psychoactive substances in the workplace, and can be a cross-cutting contribution to occupational medicine, forensic medicine, and insurance medicine, as well as for entrepreneurs, lawyers, judges, workers, and technicians from the public and private sectors that develop projects in this area. This discussion is based on general principles established internationally and highlights the role of the occupational healthcare system and other decision-making actors in the prevention and supervision of workplace psychoactive consumption.

Comparing medical and recreational cannabis use among employees: associations with health and work-related outcomes

Nearly one in five US employees reports having used cannabis in the past year. As policies and laws regarding cannabis use rapidly change, concerns have arisen over employees' use of cannabis, for both medical and recreational purposes. While extant workplace research has not distinguished between types of cannabis users, other studies have found that medical users are clinically and socio-demographically different from non-medical users. This study utilized a sample of employed National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) respondents to examine differences in workplace characteristics and health outcomes among employed medical, recreational, and mixed-use cannabis users. While some differences were initially seen when examining health and work-related outcomes between the groups, several changed after controlling for other important health-related factors. One key difference between the user groups is the higher percentages of medical and mixed-use cannabis users in the construction and mining industries. This study discusses future research needs, as well as practical implications for workers and employers.

An overview of health and safety in the Colorado cannabis industry

BACKGROUND

Understanding worker health and safety in the rapidly growing legal U.S. cannabis industry is important. Although little published research exists, workers may be exposed to biological, chemical, and physical hazards. This study investigated the Colorado cannabis industry workforce and both physical and psychosocial hazards to worker health and safety.

METHODS

Two hundred and fourteen Colorado cannabis workers completed an online survey after in-person and online recruitment. Participants answered questions about their occupation, job tasks, general well-being, occupational health and safety, cannabis use, and tobacco use.

RESULTS

Colorado cannabis workers were generally job secure and valued safety. However, they regularly consumed cannabis, expressed low concerns about workplace hazards, reported some occupational injuries and exposures, and reported inconsistent training practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Working in the cannabis industry is associated with positive outcomes for workers and their organizations, but there is an imminent need to establish formal health and safety training to implement best practices.

Medical marijuana: Challenges and risk issues for health care providers

Laws on medical marijuana and recreational use of marijuana are sweeping the country and presenting real dilemmas for health care providers and facilities. However, due to disagreements between federal and state law, there are no easy answers. Additionally, the case law and statutory law on these issues is exceedingly sparse. It may take years for all of the issues to be ironed out, but health care facilities will need to act in the meantime on what may be little more than educated guesses. It may not be appropriate to simply prohibit the use of medical marijuana, but accommodating it also has risk. This article will address what is known about the subject and what is not known about the subject. Each provider and health care facility will need to devise their own approach to the subject based on principles that are presently known, while keeping an eye on the health and safety of all involved.

Interpretation of Workplace Tests for Cannabinoids

Workplace urine drug testing for an inactive THC metabolite is common in both federally regulated and non-regulated drug testing. A positive result does not document impairment, or even recent use, when impairment is likely the most important parameter being searched for by the drug testing procedure. Most cannabinoid testing does not detect imported synthetics. Currently, urine is the most widely tested matrix, but blood, plasma, oral fluid, and hair may also be accepted in federally regulated testing in the future. This article will discuss the history, the status quo, and the possible near term future of workplace testing for marijuana in employees.

"Decision-critical" work: a conceptual framework

“Safety-sensitive” workers, also termed “safety-critical” workers, have been subject to fitness to work assessments due to concerns that a performance error may result in worker injury, injury to coworkers or the general public, and/or disruption of equipment, production or the environment. However, there exists an additional category of “decision-critical” workers, distinct from “safety-sensitive” workers, in whom impairment may impact workplace performance, relationships, attendance, reliability and quality. Adverse consequences in these latter areas may not be immediately apparent, but a potential “orbit of harm” nevertheless exists. Workplace consequences arising from impairment in “decision-critical” workers differ from those in “safety-sensitive” personnel. Despite their importance in the occupational context, “decision-critical” workers have not previously been differentiated from other workers in the published literature, and we now outline an approach to fitness to work assessment in this group.

Issues in the implementation and evolution of the commercial recreational cannabis market in Colorado

BACKGROUND

For almost a century, the cultivation, sale and use of recreational cannabis has been prohibited by law in most countries. Recently, however, under ballot initiatives four states in the US have legalised commercial, non-medical (recreational) cannabis markets. Several other states will initiate similar ballot measures attached to the 2016 election that will also appoint a new President. As the first state to implement the legislation in 2014, Colorado is an important example to begin investigating early consequences of specific policy choices while other jurisdictions consider their own legislation although the empirical evidence base is only beginning to accrue.

METHOD

This paper brings together material sourced from peer reviewed academic papers, grey literature publications, reports in mass media and niche media outlets, and government publications to outline the regulatory model and process in Colorado and to describe some of the issues that have emerged in the first 20 months of its operation.

RESULTS

These issues include tension between public health and profit, industry and investment, new methods of consumption, the black market and product testing.

CONCLUSION

The paper concludes that, while it is too early to determine the impact of the scheme, and noting that it includes some features designed to mitigate adverse impacts, it faces major challenges. Not least of these are the lack of an effective overarching federal regulatory structure, as a consequence of the federal prohibition on cannabis, combined with a rapidly growing cannabis industry which, like other industries, will seek to exploit loopholes to maximise profit.