Rheumatologists lack confidence in their knowledge of cannabinoids pertaining to the management of rheumatic complaints

Evidence for the use of cannabis-based medicines in osteoarthritis: a scoping review

The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping review to describe the evidence on the efficacy and safety of using cannabis-based medicines for osteoarthritis. The review was conducted following the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley and reported following PRISMA extension for scoping reviews guidelines. We conducted a comprehensive search across various databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, and Proquest, spanning from inception of each database to March 2023. We retrieved 2533 citations, and after deduplication, title and abstract screening, and full-text screening, 10 articles were included for analysis. These studies were composed of randomized-controlled trials (n = 4/10), cross-sectional surveys (n = 3/10), case studies (n = 2/10), and a cohort study (n = 1/10). Evidence for using cannabis-based medicines was mixed, with just 60% (n = 6/10) of included studies reporting statistically significant improvements in pain. Studies with larger samples sizes and longer durations of exposure did not find significant benefits for pain. The few adverse effects reported were generally mild and affected a minority of participants. Several studies also discovered that cannabis-based medicines were associated with a reduction in opioid use. Currently available data on the use of cannabis-based medicines in osteoarthritis is insufficient to make recommendations. Future research should address concerns regarding small sample sizes and short treatment durations to provide a more robust evidence base. Key Points • Current evidence remains mixed; studies that found a positive benefit with using cannabis-based medicines had limitations with small sample sizes and short durations of exposure • The use of cannabis-based medicines in osteoarthritis appears to be generally well tolerated, adverse effects are mild and experienced by a minority of participants • Cannabis-based medicines may decrease the use of opioids in patients with osteoarthritis • Future research should address the gaps in long-term efficacy and safety data.

Understanding the epidemiology and perceived efficacy of cannabis use in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain

BACKGROUND

The belief that cannabis has analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties continues to attract patients with chronic musculoskeletal (MSK) pain towards its use. However, the role that cannabis will play in the management of chronic MSK pain remains to be determined. This study examined 1) the rate, patterns of use, and self-reported efficacy of cannabis use among patients with chronic MSK pain and 2) the interest and potential barriers to cannabis use among patients with chronic MSK pain not currently using cannabis.

METHODS

Self-reported cannabis use and perceived efficacy were prospectively collected from chronic MSK pain patients presenting to the Orthopaedic Clinic at the University Health Network, Toronto, Canada. The primary dependent variable was current or past use of cannabis to manage chronic MSK pain; bivariate and multivariable logistic regression were used to identify patient characteristics independently associated with this outcome. Secondary outcomes were summarized descriptively, including self-perceived efficacy among cannabis users, and interest as well as barriers to cannabis use among cannabis non-users.

RESULTS

The sample included 629 patients presenting with chronic MSK pain (mean age: 56±15.7 years; 56% female). Overall, 144 (23%) reported past or present cannabis use to manage their MSK pain, with 63.7% perceiving cannabis as very or somewhat effective and 26.6% considering it as slightly effective. The strongest predictor of cannabis use in this study population was a history of recreational cannabis use (OR 12.7, p<0.001). Among cannabis non-users (N=489), 65% expressed interest in using cannabis to manage their chronic MSK pain, but common barriers to use included lack of knowledge regarding access, use and evidence, and stigma.

CONCLUSIONS

One in five patients presenting to an orthopaedic surgeon with chronic MSK pain are using or have used cannabis with the specific intent to manage their pain, and most report it to be effective. Among non-users, two-thirds reported an interest in using cannabis to manage their MSK pain, but common barriers to use existed. Future double-blind placebo-controlled trials are required to understand if this reported efficacy is accurate, and what role, if any, cannabis may play in the management of chronic MSK pain.

Enhancing the Preanesthesia Evaluation: Consensus Development of the Cannabis Use and Behaviors Assessment Tool (CUBAT)

PURPOSE

This project aimed to develop an evidence-based preanesthesia cannabis use assessment tool to acquire complete and accurate patient history and develop a best-informed, individualized anesthesia and analgesia care plan.

DESIGN

Modified Delphi.

METHODS

Using an evidence synthesis and multistage, modified Delphi process, eight experts from across the United States developed a consensus-based tool to aid in developing a best-informed, individualized plan for anesthesia and analgesia care.

FINDINGS

Two survey rounds integrated informed evidence-based tool revisions. The final tool included instructions for use, a glossary of terms, and seven key assessment items aimed at gathering the most influential information regarding cannabis use.

CONCLUSIONS

The Cannabis Use and Behaviors Assessment Tool is a first-of-its-kind tool providing an essential framework for preanesthesia cannabis use assessment.

The Use of Tetrahydrocannabinol Is Associated with an Increase in Survival Time in Palliative Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study

Introduction

Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is often prescribed for ambulatory palliative patients to improve sleep quality and appetite and to reduce anxiety, stress, and pain. However, it is not known if THC has also an effect on the mortality of these patients.

Method

The objective was the impact of THC on mortality of ambulatory palliative patients. For this purpose, data from the palliative treatment documentation from 5 ambulatory palliative care teams in Brandenburg, Germany were used for this analysis. Survival time was calculated for 3 groups of patients: (1) without THC; (2) with THC in a low dosage (≤4.7 mg per day); and (3) THC in higher doses (≥4.7 mg per day). The analysis was done for 2 cohorts of patients. Cohort 1: all patients with a survival time of at least 7 days after inclusion in specialized ambulatory palliative care (SAPC) and cohort 2: a subgroup of patients with a survival time between 7 and 100 days. Kaplan-Meier curves were created, and multivariate analysis was done to investigate the impact of THC on mortality.

Results

A total of 9,419 patients with a survival time of at least 7 days after inclusion in SAPC were included in the analysis (cohort 1). 7,085 among them had a survival time between 7 and 100 days (cohort 2). In both cohorts, survival time was significantly prolonged by THC, but only when the daily THC dose was above the median of 4.7 mg. Survival time was 15 days longer in cohort 2 (40 vs. 25 days), when more than 4.7 mg THC were prescribed per day.

Conclusion

Use of THC is associated with a significant increase in survival time in ambulatory palliative patients which survive longer than 7 days the initiation of THC prescription and which use of THC >4.7 mg/day.

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.

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, perception, and beliefs of Saudi physicians at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh related to medical cannabis: Literature review and a cross-sectional survey

Cannabis is an herbaceous flowering plant, originally an indigenous plant in Eastern Asia, which later spread globally due to widespread agricultural practices. Cannabis was used medicinally until the early twentieth century, but subsequently prohibited due to the psychoactive effects.

Aims

To explore the medical cannabis-related level of knowledge of physicians at King Abdulaziz Medical City, including patient needs, perceptions of therapeutic effects, potential harm, and the willingness to prescribe if legalized in future.

Methodology

The study was a cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey. It was conducted at King Abdulaziz Medical City in Riyadh from February 2020 to February 2021. All physicians from the different specialties, who consented to participate, were included in this study.

Statistical Analysis

Descriptive statistics are presented as mean and standard deviation and proportions. An ANOVA test was applied to measure the association of the beliefs regarding the right to prescribe with overall knowledge. All tests were considered significant at P < 0.05.

Results

A total of 249 physicians participated with the majority (70%) male. The sample was similar regardless of the physician's position in the medical hierarchy, with a mean work experience of 8 years. Almost half of the participants indicated that they do not have good knowledge regarding the effects of MC products and more than half that they are unaware of the different MC products and formulations currently available.

Conclusion

The majority of the sample lacked knowledge about the medicinal use of cannabis for specific indications and felt uncomfortable to discuss the medicinal use of cannabis with their patients.

The evolving culture of medical cannabis in Canada for the management of chronic pain

Although used therapeutically for millennia, cannabis has been a prohibited substance worldwide for most of the 20th Century. With revision of prohibitive regulations in many jurisdictions during the past 2 decades, cannabis is increasingly available to patients as a potential treatment option for various symptoms. Pain relief, sleep promotion and alleviation of distress, depression and anxiety are the most common reasons for cannabis use. Canada has been at the forefront of medical cannabis (MC) legislation revisions to enable and facilitate access for therapeutic use. Although initially viewed with caution and stigma, attitudes to cannabis in general have changed. Medical cannabis is identified as the herbal plant product sourced from a grower/producer and is not at present a regulated pharmaceutical product. Medical cannabis use is currently prevalent in Canada but has bypassed the rigorous study required for usual drug approval. Although uptake has been enthusiastic by patients, the medical community has voiced cautions and concerns. Access to medical cannabis is fairly easy once an approval document is obtained from a healthcare professional, but without obligation for medical or pharmacy oversight. The greatest concern is a dearth of sound clinical evidence for effects and harms. Emerging concerns include prevalent patient self-management with information based on personal research, an abundance of on-line information which may not always be accurate, the emergence of designated "cannabis clinics," potential risks to society due to accidents, and high cost of the legal medical product leading to access via the recreational market. With cannabis now entrenched in Canadian healthcare, physicians must be sufficiently knowledgeable to provide guidance that is evidence-based and will ensure personal and societal harm reduction. Examination of the changing culture of medical cannabis in Canada will provide insight for countries that may be anticipating similar revisions of cannabis regulations to allow cannabis access for their patient population and learn from the issues created by recreational legalization.

Perceptions of Cannabis Use: A Qualitative Descriptive Study of Rheumatology Patients

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

Some rheumatology patients use or contemplate using cannabis, however, may not be transparent about use with their providers. The objective of this qualitative descriptive study was to describe beliefs, perceptions, and learning needs of adults with rheumatic conditions regarding the use of cannabis products.

METHODS

Purposive sampling was conducted through a rheumatology clinic and sought participants who were using or thinking about using cannabis. Two online focus groups based on cannabis use patterns (non-users and users) were conducted separately. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Three research team members read the transcripts independently to identify initial codes and themes. Data saturation was reached with the interviews.

RESULTS

We recruited 12 participants between 52 and 85 years old. The first theme was pain and desperation. Stigma was the second theme with a perception of physician opposition to cannabis, and the reluctance of many participants to discuss cannabis use with physicians. The final theme was a need for information and a general lack of trustworthy and credible sources. Users were willing to try cannabis even if they still had questions.

CONCLUSION

Rheumatology patients are open to using cannabis due to the burden and suffering associated with pain. They remain silent on the topic, however, because of stigma and lack of engagement from health care professionals, particularly physicians. Patients voiced a strong need for information regarding cannabis and want healthcare providers to initiate discussion. These findings are clinically relevant to the management of rheumatic conditions and the promotion of therapeutic relationships.

Increase in Cannabis Use Among Adults With Rheumatic Diseases: Results From a 2014-2019 United States Observational Study

OBJECTIVE

Despite advances in treatments and outcomes among patients with rheumatic diseases, there is an unmet need in pain management. Cannabis has emerged as a potential opioid-sparing alternative, with arthritic pain as a commonly cited reason for medicinal cannabis use. However, little is known, and we set out to understand patterns of cannabis use in a US-wide rheumatic disease population.

METHODS

The study included participants in FORWARD, The National Databank for Rheumatic Diseases. Participants were asked in 2014 and 2019 about their past and current cannabis use. Demographic characteristics, patient-reported outcomes, medications, comorbidities, and diagnoses were compared between cannabis users and non-users with t-tests, chi-square tests, logistic regression, and geographic assessment.

RESULTS

Among 11,006 respondents, cannabis use increased from 6.3% in 2014 to 18.4% in 2019, with the greatest prevalence of use in states where cannabis use was legalized. Most users (74% and 62% in 2014 and 2019, respectively) reported that cannabis was effective in the relief of arthritis symptoms. Cannabis users were more likely to be taking weak opioids (odds ratio 1.2 [95% confidence interval 1.0, 1.5], P = 0.03), to have a history of smoking tobacco (odds ratio 1.7 [95% confidence interval 1.5, 2.1], P < 0.001), and had worse measures on all assessed patient-reported outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Reported cannabis use in this cohort increased significantly between 2014 and 2019. Characteristics of users suggest that those who try cannabis are feeling worse symptomatically, and their pain management needs may not be adequately addressed by other therapies. The association between cannabis, opioids, and patient-reported outcomes highlight areas for future work.

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.

Exploring the medical cannabis prescribing behaviours of New Zealand physicians

INTRODUCTION

Many countries are changing their regulations for prescribing medical cannabis. As gatekeepers, physicians significantly impact patient access to cannabis treatments. It is important to explore how physicians view prescribing cannabis in terms of their existing beliefs, knowledge, possible concerns and personal perceptions.

METHODS

Individual, semi-structured telephone interviews were undertaken with 14 New Zealand physicians from various specialties. The interviews were thematically analysed using a phenomenological approach.

RESULTS

The physician-patient relationship was of extreme importance in making prescription decisions, driven largely by trust in the patient. Barriers to prescribing included concern over possible side effects, the quality and standardisation of medication, uncertainty about indications and equity concerns from the high cost for lower socio-economic patients. Some physicians held concerns over their liability and risks to their reputation if issues arose for patients.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The way physicians regard prescribing medical cannabis is based on their personal beliefs and knowledge built up over their medical career. It is important that these are taken into consideration in the design of future guidelines to help alleviate uncertainties and reduce barriers for informed prescribing. While our research and previous research find that physicians generally will follow clinical guidelines based on institutional logics (i.e. the standardised approach to medicine), we find that physicians often allow their personal construals to determine their perceptions and prescribing behaviour to a considerable extent when they practice medicine. Our findings have implications for Continuing Medical Education, marketing and regulation for medical cannabis, especially about the wording of guideline adherence.

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.

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.

Are Cannabis, Cannabis-Derived Products, and Synthetic Cannabinoids a Therapeutic Tool for Rheumatoid Arthritis? A Friendly Summary of the Body of Evidence

BACKGROUND

Symptom management in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) remains a complex challenge. Widespread use of cannabis-based medicines for a myriad of symptoms has fostered rheumatology patients' interest. However, their safety and efficacy in RA remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to perform a structured summary of the body of evidence in order to determine whether cannabis, cannabis-derived products, and synthetic cannabinoids are an effective treatment for rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

An electronic search in Epistemonikos database was performed to identify systematic reviews and their primary studies that addressed our clinical question. The body of evidence was collected in a pivot table in Epistemonikos. Information and data from the primary studies were extracted from the identified reviews. Finally, extracted data were reanalyzed, and a summary of findings table was generated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

Twenty-six systematic reviews were identified which included in total only 1 randomized trial assessing our clinical question.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabis, cannabis-derived products and synthetic cannabinoids may slightly reduce disease activity in patients with RA. Its use may result in little to no difference in pain reduction and may slightly increase nervous system adverse events. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of cannabis, cannabis-derived products, and synthetic cannabinoids on serious adverse events risk.

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.

Exploring cannabis use and perspectives among psoriatic disease patients

OBJECTIVE

To assess the correlation between cannabis use and psoriatic disease severity, health-related quality of life, pain, psychosocial outcomes, and cytokine levels in psoriasis (PsC) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients.

METHODS

PsC and PsA patients enrolled in the International Psoriasis and Arthritis Research Team (IPART) program were surveyed on cannabis use and were asked to provide a serum and urine sample. Demographic and clinical variables were compared between users and non-users using Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables, and chi-square or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables.

RESULTS

Of 151 respondents, 30% reported current cannabis use within the last year. Compared to non-users, cannabis users were younger and had a shorter PsA duration and poorer mental health as measured by the SF-36. Other measures of health-related quality of life and pain were comparable between the groups. Respondents' primary perceived benefits of cannabis use were aid in sleep and arthritis pain relief, but there was no difference in pain between users and non-users. No THC was detected in the urine of non-users while users had a mean level of 19.6 ng/ml. Serum IL-23 levels were statistically significantly higher in non-users than in users.

CONCLUSION

A third of the patients used cannabis within the past year, and 54.3% of users reported the use of cannabis for arthritis pain relief. However, there was no difference in pain scores. Comprehensive education for providers on the current body of evidence and further studies on cannabis use and outcomes in psoriatic disease are needed. Key Points • A third of patients with psoriatic arthritis have used cannabis in the past year. • Most used it for better sleep and control of pain. • There was no difference in pain scores between users and non-users. • IL-23 levels were significantly higher in non-users.

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].

Cannabis and Autoimmunity: Possible Mechanisms of Action

Medical cannabis (MC) describes the usually inhaled or ingested use of a cannabis plant or cannabis extract for medicinal purposes. The action of whole cannabis plants is extremely complex because their large number of active compounds not only bind to a plethora of different receptors but also interact with each other both synergistically and otherwise. Renewed interest in the medicinal properties of cannabis has led to increasing research into the practical uses of cannabis derivatives, and it has been found that the endocannabinoid system (particularly CB2 receptor activation) is a possible target for the treatment of inflammatory and the autoimmune diseases related to immune cell activation. However, in vivo findings still lack, creating difficulties in applying translational cannabinoid research to human immune functions. In this review, we summarized the main mechanisms of action of medical cannabis plant especially regarding the immune system and the endocannabinoid system, looking at preliminary clinical data in three most important autoimmune diseases of three different specialities: rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis and inflammatory bowel disease.

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.

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.

Patient Perception Regarding Potential Effectiveness of Cannabis for Pain Management

BACKGROUND

Self-reported cannabis use has increased since its recent legalization in many states. The primary objective of this study is to describe patients' beliefs regarding the potential effectiveness of cannabis and gauge patient acceptance of these compounds if prescribed by a physician.

METHODS

Five hundred fifty-five consecutive new patients in a total joint arthroplasty (TJA) practice completed a questionnaire at their new patient or preoperative encounter. Questions regarding their beliefs about the potential effectiveness of cannabis for pain management were presented to the patient. Each question was scored in accordance to the agreement of the patient. Data were also collected on patient demographics, and current cannabis, tobacco, and/or alcohol use.

RESULTS

Current cannabis use was reported in 20.2% (112/555) of respondents. Patients were interested in using cannabis if prescribed by a physician for acute (75.3%, 418/515) and chronic (74.4%, 415/555) pain. Seventy-seven percent (428/555) of patients believe (strongly agree or agree) that cannabis should be legalized for medical use, whereas only 39% (217/555) strongly agree or agree that cannabis should be legalized for recreational use. Patients strongly agree or agree that cannabis can help with sleep or anxiety, 44.9% (249/555) and 49.4% (274/555) respectively. Most patients had never smoked (53%, 294/555) and drink one or less alcoholic beverage per week (52.1%, 299/555).

CONCLUSION

Patients believe that cannabis may be helpful for pain management after TJA and are willing to use if prescribed by their orthopedic provider. Further research is warranted to determine if cannabis is a helpful adjunct to pain management in this patient population.

Cannabis for medical and scientific purposes: the Colombian landscape

The Colombian government, through Law 1787 of 2016, has created a regulatory framework that allows its citizens to have a safe and informed access to cannabis and its derivatives for medical and scientific purposes. Our country joins others in their efforts to legalize cannabis-derived substances for therapeutic purposes, as many jurisdictions have recognized the potential these products have in the treatment of certain medical conditions. This paper describes the current medical cannabis outlook in Colombia, compares the different medical cannabis supply systems in other parts of the world, summarizes the evidence related to the potential therapeutic benefits and potential risks of using cannabis for medical purposes.

[Cannabis-based medicines for chronic pain: indications, selection of drugs, effectiveness and safety : Experiences of pain physicians in Saarland]

BACKGROUND

There are uncertainties among physicians with respect to the indications, selection of drugs, effectiveness and safety of cannabis-based medicines for chronic pain.

METHODS

All statutory health insurance pain physicians in Saarland were asked to complete a self-developed questionnaire assessing their experiences with cannabis-based medicines, which they prescribed between 10 March 2017 and 30 November 2018 for adult patients with chronic cancer and non-cancer pain.

RESULTS

All statutory health insurance pain physicians participated in the survey and 13 out of 20 reported having prescribed cannabis-based medicines. The most frequent reasons for prescriptions in 136 patients (1.9% of the patients of the institutions) were failure of established treatment (73%) and desire of the patient (63%). In 35% of patients the type of pain was nociceptive, in 34% neuropathic, in 29% nociceptive and neuropathic and in 13% nociplastic. Dronabinol was prescribed for 95% of the patients and 71% were responders (clinically relevant reduction of pain or of other symptoms). In 29% of patients treatment was terminated due to either a lack of efficacy or adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Statutory health insurance pain physicians in Saarland were reluctant to prescribe cannabis-based medicines. Dronabinol was effective and well-tolerated in the majority of the highly selected patients.

High-Frequency Medical Cannabis Use Is Associated With Worse Pain Among Individuals With Chronic Pain

Cannabis is widely used for chronic pain. However, there is some evidence of an inverse dose-response relationship between cannabis effects and pain relief that may negatively affect analgesic outcomes. In this cross-sectional survey, we examined whether daily cannabis use frequency was associated with pain severity and interference, quality of life measures relevant to pain (eg, anxiety and depressive symptoms), and cannabis use preferences (administration routes and cannabinoid ratio). Our analysis included 989 adults who used cannabis every day for chronic pain. Participant use was designated as light, moderate, and heavy (1-2, 3-4, and 5 or more cannabis uses per day, respectively). The sample was also subgrouped by self-reported medical-only use (designated MED, n = 531, 54%) versus medical use concomitant with a past-year history of recreational use (designated MEDREC, n = 458, 46%). In the whole sample, increased frequency of use was significantly associated with worse pain intensity and interference, and worse negative affect, although high-frequency users also reported improved positive affect. Subgroup analyses showed that these effects were driven by MED participants. Heavy MED participant consumption patterns showed greater preference for smoking, vaporizing, and high tetrahydrocannabinol products. In contrast, light MED participants had greater preference for tinctures and high cannabidiol products. Selection bias, our focus on chronic pain, and our cross-sectional design likely limit the generalizability of our results. Our findings suggest that lower daily cannabis use frequency is associated with better clinical profile as well as lower risk cannabis use behaviors among MED participants. Future longitudinal studies are needed to examine how high frequency of cannabis use interacts with potential therapeutic benefits. PERSPECTIVE: Our findings suggest that lower daily cannabis use frequency is associated with better clinical profile as well as safer use behaviors (eg, preference for cannabidiol and noninhalation administration routes). These trends highlight the need for developing cannabis use guidelines for clinicians to better protect patients using cannabis.

Predicting Physicians' Intentions to Recommend Medical Cannabis

CONTEXT

Although medical cannabis (MC) policies continue to evolve around the world, the integration of MC into clinical practice remains highly debated within the medical community.

OBJECTIVES

Relying on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), this study aim was to identify underlying factors that influence physicians' intentions to recommend MC to patients and to examine whether there are differences in the strength of these associations across three medical specialties (family medicine, oncology, and pain medicine).

METHODS

247 physicians completed questionnaires including measures of TPB constructs (attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control) and intentions to recommend MC to two clinical vignettes describing medical background of a cancer and a chronic pain patient. Regression models were used to measure the extent to which perceived knowledge and TPB constructs predict physicians' intentions to recommend MC.

RESULTS

Physicians' intentions to recommend MC to the cancer patient vignette was higher than their intentions to recommend to the chronic pain patient vignette. Intentions to recommend MC to the patient with cancer were associated with more favorable attitudes toward MC, whereas intentions to recommend MC to the patient with chronic pain were associated with more favorable attitudes, higher levels of perceived control, and lower levels of perceived knowledge.

CONCLUSION

Clinical practices related to MC may be influenced by nonmedical factors, and this may be particularly prevailing in the field of chronic pain, suggesting that MC may be particularly contentious in this field.

Cannabinoids for the treatment of rheumatic diseases - where do we stand?

As medical use of cannabis is increasingly legalized worldwide, a better understanding of the medical and hazardous effects of this drug is imperative. The pain associated with rheumatic diseases is considered a prevalent indication for medicinal cannabis in various countries. Thus far, preliminary clinical trials have explored the effects of cannabis on rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis and fibromyalgia; preliminary evidence has also found an association between the cannabinoid system and other rheumatic conditions, including systemic sclerosis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis. The potential medicinal effects of cannabis could be attributable to its influence on the immune system, as it exerts an immunomodulatory effect on various immune cells, including T cells, B cells and macrophages. However, the available evidence is not yet sufficient to support the recommendation of cannabinoid treatment for rheumatic diseases.

Efficacy and safety of cannabidiol followed by an open label add-on of tetrahydrocannabinol for the treatment of chronic pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis or ankylosing spondylitis: protocol for a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled study

INTRODUCTION

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) are chronic, systemic, inflammatory diseases, primarily in the musculoskeletal system. Pain and fatigue are key symptoms of RA and AS. Treatment presents a clinical challenge for several reasons, including the progressive nature of the diseases and the involvement of multiple pain mechanisms. Moreover, side effects of pain treatment pose an implicit risk. Currently, no well-controlled studies have investigated how medical cannabis affects pain and cognitive functions in RA and AS. The present study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of medical cannabis in the treatment of persistent pain in patients with RA and AS with low disease activity.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A double-blinded, randomised, placebo-controlled study of cannabidiol (CBD), followed by an open label add-on of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) with collection of clinical data and biological materials in RA and AS patients treated in routine care. The oral treatment with CBD in the experimental group is compared with placebo in a control group for 12 weeks, followed by an observational 12-week period with an open label add-on of THC in the primary CBD non-responders. Disease characteristics, psychological parameters, demographics, comorbidities, lifestyle factors, blood samples and serious adverse events are collected at baseline, after 12 and 24 weeks of treatment, and at a follow-up visit at 36 weeks. Data will be analysed in accordance with a predefined statistical analysis plan.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Danish Ethics Committee (S-20170217), the Danish Medicines Agency (S-2018010018) and the Danish Data Protection Agency approved the protocol. The project is registered in the European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT 2017-004226-15). All participants will give written informed consent to participate prior to any study-related procedures. The results will be presented at international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

Management of Inflammatory Arthritis in pregnancy: a National Cross-Sectional Survey of Canadian rheumatologists

Background

With improved therapies and management, more women with inflammatory arthritides (IA) are considering pregnancy. Our objective was to survey rheumatologists across Canada about their IA management in pregnancy to identify practice patterns and knowledge gaps.

Methods

We administered an online survey with questions regarding medications for IA treatment including conventional synthetic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) and biologics/small molecules in planned and unplanned pregnancies. Email invitations were sent to members of the Canadian Rheumatology Association. We calculated responses frequencies and a priori set a cut-off of ≥75% to define consensus.

Results

Ninety rheumatologists participated in the survey (20% participation rate); 57% have been practicing for > 10 years, 32% for ≤10 years, and 11% in training. There was consensus on discontinuation of 4 csDMARDs – cyclophosphamide (100%), leflunomide (98%), methotrexate (96%), and mycophenolate mofetil (89%) – in planned pregnancies but varied responses on when to discontinue them or what to do in unplanned pregnancies. Respondents agreed that 3 csDMARDs – azathioprine (84%), hydroxychloroquine (95%), and sulfasalazine (77%) – were safe to continue in planned and unplanned pregnancies. There was consensus with use of 4 biologics – adalimumab (81%), certolizumab (80%), etanercept (83%), and infliximab (76%) – in planned pregnancies but uncertainty on when they should be discontinued and their use in unplanned pregnancies.

Conclusions

This national survey shows consensus among rheumatologists on the use of some csDMARDs and biologics/small molecules in IA patients planning pregnancy but varied knowledge on when to discontinue and what to do in unplanned pregnancies.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s41927-019-0065-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Health professional beliefs, knowledge, and concerns surrounding medicinal cannabis - A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The number of jurisdictions allowing access to medicinal cannabis has been steadily increasing since the state of California introduced legislation in 1996. Although there is a high degree of legislative heterogeneity across jurisdictions, the involvement of a health professional is common among all. This places health professionals at the forefront of therapy, yet no systematic review of literature has offered insight into the beliefs, knowledge, and concerns of health professionals regarding medicinal cannabis.

METHODS

Using a predetermined study protocol, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus databases were searched for studies indexed up to the 1st August 2018. Pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied uniformly. Screening for relevancy, full-text review, data extraction, and risk of bias were completed by two independent investigators. Risk of bias was assessed using CASP criteria (qualitative) and a modified domain-based risk assessment tool (quantitative).

RESULTS

Of the 15,775 studies retrieved, 106 underwent full-text review and of these, 26 were included. The overall risk of bias was considered low across all included studies. The general impression was that health professionals supported the use of medicinal cannabis in practice; however, there was a unanimous lack of self-perceived knowledge surrounding all aspects of medicinal cannabis. Health professionals also voiced concern regarding direct patient harms and indirect societal harms.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review has offered a lens through which to view the existing literature surrounding the beliefs, knowledge, and concerns of health professionals regarding medicinal cannabis. These results are limited, however, by the implicit common-sense models of behaviour utilised by the included studies. Before strategies can be developed and implemented to change health professional behaviour, a more thorough understanding of the factors that underpin the delivery of medicinal cannabis is necessary.

Survey of Australian psychiatrists' and psychiatry trainees' knowledge about and attitudes towards medicinal cannabinoids

OBJECTIVE:

To assess Australian psychiatrists' and psychiatry trainees' knowledge about and attitudes towards medicinal cannabinoids, given the recent relaxation of cannabinoid-prescribing laws in Australia.

METHOD:

All Australian members of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists were invited to participate in an anonymous, 64-item online questionnaire, through Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists' newsletters. The questionnaire ran for a 10-week period from March to May 2017. Participants were asked about their knowledge of the evidence for and against prescribing pharmaceutical-grade cannabidiol and tetrahydrocannabinol, and their concerns about prescribing medicinal cannabinoids.

RESULTS:

In total, 88 doctors responded to the survey, with 55 completing all items (23 psychiatrists, 32 trainees). Overall, 54% of respondents would prescribe medicinal cannabinoids if it was legal to do so. Participants believed there was evidence for the use of cannabidiol and tetrahydrocannabinol in treating childhood epilepsy, chronic pain, and nausea and vomiting. They were most concerned about medicinal cannabinoids leading to psychotic symptoms, addiction and dependence, apathy and recreational use.

CONCLUSIONS:

Our sample of Australian psychiatrists and trainees were aware of the main clinical indications for medicinal cannabinoids, but were poor at differentiating between the indications for cannabidiol versus tetrahydrocannabinol. Further education about medicinal cannabinoids appears necessary.

Has Self-reported Marijuana Use Changed in Patients Undergoing Total Joint Arthroplasty After the Legalization of Marijuana?

BACKGROUND

Marijuana use has become more accessible since its recent legalization in several states. However, its use in a total joint arthroplasty population to our knowledge has not been reported, and the implications of its use in this setting remain unclear.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We report (1) the self-reported use of marijuana in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty both before and after its legalization; and (2) clinical and demographic factors associated with marijuana use in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty.

METHODS

One thousand records of patients undergoing primary total joint arthroplasty (500 consecutive before and 500 consecutive after the legalization of the commercial sale of marijuana in Colorado) were included for analysis. Preoperative medical history and physicals were retrospectively reviewed for self-reported and reasons (medicinal versus recreational) for use. Additionally, patient records were used to determine insurance type, age, gender, smoking status, history of substance abuse, preoperative narcotic use, alcohol intake, and the type of arthroplasty performed.

RESULTS

Self-reported use after legalization dramatically increased from 1% (four of 500) to 11% (55 of 500) (odds ratio [OR], 15.3 [95% confidence interval, 5.5-42.6]; p < 0.001) after legalization. For those reporting use after legalization, 46% (25 of 55) of patients reported recreational use, 26% (14 of 55) medicinal use, 27% (15 of 55) did not report a reason for use, and 2% (one of 55) reported both recreational and medicinal use. Factors associated with use included younger age (with a 10-year mean difference between the groups [p < 0.001]), male gender (36 of 59 users [61%] versus 411 of 941 nonusers [44%]; OR, 2.02; p < 0.01), current smokers (22 of 59 users [37%] versus 54 of 941 [6%] nonusers; OR, 0.09; p < 0.01), a history of substance abuse (eight of 59 users [14%] versus 18 of 941 nonusers [2%]; OR, 8.04; p < 0.001), insurance type (Medicaid only, 28 of 59 [48%] users versus 56 of 941 [6%] nonusers; OR, 20.45; p < 0.01), and preoperative narcotic use (eight of 59 users [14%] versus 17 of 941 nonusers [2%]; OR, 2.4; p < 0.001). We did not find differences with regard to alcohol use, amount of alcohol consumption, or insurance types other than Medicaid.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest the legalization of marijuana has led to either more users or more patients who are willing to report its use given the lack of legal ramifications. Despite these findings, the evidence to date precludes the use of marijuana postoperatively in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty. Further investigation, ideally in a prospective randomized manner, should focus on opioid consumption, nausea, sleep patterns, and outcomes in patients using marijuana who are undergoing total joint arthroplasty before recommendations can be made for its use.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Availability and approval of cannabis-based medicines for chronic pain management and palliative/supportive care in Europe: A survey of the status in the chapters of the European Pain Federation

BACKGROUND

There is considerable public and political interest in the use of cannabis products for medical purposes.

METHODS

The task force of the European Pain Federation (EFIC) conducted a survey with its national chapters representatives on the status of approval of all types of cannabis-based medicines, the covering of costs and the availability of a position paper of a national medical association on the use of medical cannabis for chronic pain and for symptom control in palliative/supportive care.

RESULTS

Thirty-one out of 37 contacted councillors responded. Plant-derived tetrahydrocannabinol/cannabidiol (THC/CBD) oromucosal spray is approved for spasticity in multiple sclerosis refractory to conventional treatment in 21 EFIC chapters. Plant-derived THC (dronabinol) is approved for some palliative care conditions in four EFIC chapters. Synthetic THC analogue (nabilone) is approved for chemotherapy-associated nausea and vomiting refractory to conventional treatment in four EFIC chapters'. Eight EFIC chapters' countries have an exceptional and six chapters an expanded access programme for medical cannabis. German and Israeli pain societies recommend the use of cannabis-based medicines as third-line drug therapies for chronic pain within a multicomponent approach. Conversely, the German medical association and a team of finish experts and officials do not recommend the prescription of medical cannabis due to the lack of high-quality evidence of efficacy and the potential harms.

CONCLUSIONS

There are marked differences between the countries represented in EFIC in the approval and availability of cannabis-based products for medical use. EFIC countries are encouraged to collaborate with the European Medicines Agency to publish a common document on cannabis-based medicines.

SIGNIFICANCE

There are striking differences between European countries in the availability of plant-derived and synthetic cannabinoids and of medical cannabis for pain management and for symptom control in palliative care and in the covering of costs by health insurance companies or state social security systems.

Cannabinoids in Pain Management and Palliative Medicine

BACKGROUND

There are conflicting interpretations of the evidence regarding the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of cannabinoids in pain management and palliative medicine.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review (SR) of systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCT) and prospective long-term observational studies of the use of cannabinoids in pain management and palliative medicine. Pertinent publications from January 2009 to January 2017 were retrieved by a selective search in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Medline. The methodological quality of the SRs was assessed with the AMSTAR instrument, and the clinical relevance of quantitative data syntheses was assessed according to the standards of the Cochrane Collaboration.

RESULTS

Of the 750 publications identified, 11 SRs met the inclusion criteria; 3 of them were of high and 8 of moderate methodological quality. 2 prospective long-term observational studies with medical cannabis and 1 with tetrahydrocannabinol/cannabidiol spray (THC/CBD spray) were also analyzed. There is limited evidence for a benefit of THC/CBD spray in the treatment of neuropathic pain. There is inadequate evidence for any benefit of cannabinoids (dronabinol, nabilone, medical cannabis, or THC/CBD spray) to treat cancer pain, pain of rheumatic or gastrointestinal origin, or anorexia in cancer or AIDS. Treatment with cannabis-based medicines is associated with central nervous and psychiatric side effects.

CONCLUSION

The public perception of the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of cannabis-based medicines in pain management and palliative medicine conflicts with the findings of systematic reviews and prospective observational studies conducted according to the standards of evidence-based medicine.

Attitudes of Israeli Rheumatologists to the Use of Medical Cannabis as Therapy for Rheumatic Disorders

BACKGROUND

While medical cannabis has been used for thousands of years in the treatment of pain and other symptoms, evidence-based use is limited and practitioners face multiple areas of uncertainty regarding the rational use of these compounds. Nonetheless, an increasing public interest and advocacy in favor of medical cannabis is causing the issue to be encountered ever more frequently by physicians in different fields of medicine and particularly in rheumatology. In view of this situation, we have surveyed the attitudes of Israeli rheumatologists to the use of medical cannabis.

OBJECTIVES

As rheumatologists are specialized in caring for patients presenting with musculoskeletal complaints, the confidence of rheumatologists' knowledge of cannabinoids was surveyed.

METHODS

All members of the Israeli Society of Rheumatology were surveyed by e-mail for their confidence and knowledge of cannabinoids and their perceived competence to prescribe herbal cannabis.

RESULTS

A total of 23 out of 119 (19.3%) Israeli rheumatologists approached returned the questionnaire. Three-quarters of responders were not confident about their knowledge of cannabinoid molecules or ability to write a prescription for herbal cannabis, and 78% were not confident to write a prescription for herbal cannabis; 74% of responders held the opinion that there was some role for cannabinoids in the management of rheumatic disease.

CONCLUSION

Israeli rheumatologists lack confidence in their knowledge of cannabinoids in general, yet are open to the possibility of introducing this treatment. Additional data and guidance are necessary in order to allow rational utilization of cannabinoids for management of rheumatic pain.