RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The legal climate for cannabis use has dramatically changed with an increasing number of states passing legislation legalizing access for medical and recreational use. Among cancer patients, cannabis is often used to ameliorate adverse effects of cancer treatment. Data are limited on the extent and type of use among cancer patients during treatment and the perceived benefits and harms. This multicenter survey was conducted to assess the use of cannabis among cancer patients residing in states with varied legal access to cannabis. METHODS: A total of 12 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers, across states with varied cannabis-access legal status, conducted surveys with a core questionnaire to assess cannabis use among recently diagnosed cancer patients. Data were collected between September 2021 and August 2023 and pooled across 12 cancer centers. Frequencies and 95% confidence intervals for core survey measures were calculated, and weighted estimates are presented for the 10 sites that drew probability samples. RESULTS: Overall reported cannabis use since cancer diagnosis among survey respondents was 32.9% (weighted), which varied slightly by state legalization status. The most common perceived benefits of use were for pain, sleep, stress and anxiety, and treatment side effects. Reported perceived risks were less common and included inability to drive, difficulty concentrating, lung damage, addiction, and impact on employment. A majority reported feeling comfortable speaking to health-care providers though, overall, only 21.5% reported having done so. Among those who used cannabis since diagnosis, the most common modes were eating in food, smoking, and pills or tinctures, and the most common reasons were for sleep disturbance, followed by pain and stress and anxiety with 60%-68% reporting improved symptoms with use. CONCLUSION: This geographically diverse survey demonstrates that patients use cannabis regardless of its legal status. Addressing knowledge gaps concerning benefits and harms of cannabis use during cancer treatment is critical to enhance patient-provider communication.
Asunto(s)
Marihuana Medicinal , Neoplasias , Humanos , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Neoplasias/psicología , Neoplasias/terapia , Femenino , Masculino , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Prevalencia , Adulto , Marihuana Medicinal/uso terapéutico , Marihuana Medicinal/efectos adversos , National Cancer Institute (U.S.) , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Instituciones Oncológicas/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , PercepciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Digital determinants of health (DDoH), including access to technological tools and digital health literacy, function independently as barriers to health. Assessment for DDoH is not routine within most health care systems, although addressing DDoH could help mitigate differential health outcomes and the digital divide. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the role of individual-level DDoH factors on patient enrollment in and use of the patient portal. METHODS: We developed a multimodal, cross-sectional survey and deployed it to 11,424 individuals based on their preferred mode and language documented within the electronic medical record. Based on the Technology Acceptance Model, enrollment in and intent to use the patient portal were the outcomes of interest. Perceived usefulness and ease of use were assessed to determine construct validity, and exploratory investigations included individual-level DDoH, including internet and device access, availability of technological support, medical complexity, individual relationship with the health care system, and digital health literacy. Counts (n) and proportions (%) were used to describe response categories, and adjusted and unadjusted odds ratios are reported. RESULTS: This study included 1850 respondents (11,424 invited, 16.2% response rate), who were mostly female (1048/1850, 56.6%) and White (1240/1850, 67%), with an average age of 63 years. In the validation of the Technology Acceptance Model, measures of perceived ease of use (ie, using the patient portal will require a lot of mental effort; the patient portal will be very easy to use) and perceived usefulness (ie, the usefulness of the patient portal to send and receive messages with providers, schedule appointments, and refill medications) were positively associated with both enrollment in and intent to use the patient portal. Within adjusted models, perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness constructs, in addition to constructs of digital health literacy, knowing what health resources are available on the internet (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.5, 95% CI 1.8-6.6), portal ease of use (aOR 2.8, 95% CI 1.6-5), and portal usefulness (aOR 2.4, 95% CI 1.4-4.2) were significantly associated with patient portal enrollment. Other factors associated with patient portal enrollment and intent to use included being comfortable reading and speaking English, reported use of the internet to surf the web or to send or receive emails, home internet access, and access to technology devices (computer, tablet, smartphone, etc). CONCLUSIONS: Assessing for and addressing individual-level DDoH, including digital health literacy, access to digital tools and technologies, and support of the relational aspects between patients, social support systems, and health care providers, could help mitigate disparities in health. By focusing efforts to assess for and address individual-level DDoH, an opportunity exists to improve digitally driven health care delivery outcomes like access and structural outcomes like bias built within algorithms created with incomplete representation across communities.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of a remote mental health program for managing anxiety and depression, primarily using asynchronous digital communication. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study examined U.S. adults seeking remote care for anxiety and depression from January 2021 to May 2022. The program involves clinician-led assessment, patient education, medication management, and ongoing monitoring, primarily via text. Anxiety and depression were measured using Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) scores. Outcomes examined were changes in scores, 50% score improvement rate, and remission rate (score <5) at 1, 3, and 6 months. RESULTS: During the period evaluated, 11,844 program participants met the inclusion criteria. Most were female (n = 8328, 70.3%); their age ranged from 18-82 years (median 31 years). At baseline, median PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores were 13 (IQR 9-17); 67% and 69% met score criteria for depression and anxiety, respectively. Most participants (80%) were prescribed a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI). By one month, average PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores decreased significantly by 9.2 and 9.1 points (both p < .01). At 1-month follow-up, the 50% score improvement rate was 66% for PHQ-9 and 69% GAD-7 (p < .01). Scores continued to decrease with follow-up. At 3 months, over half achieved remission (percent [95% CI]: 52% [51-54] for anxiety, 53% [52-55] for depression). Similar improvement was observed at 6 months and in sensitivity analyses accounting for loss to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a remote mental health program with digital tools was associated with significant clinical improvement in anxiety and depression. Challenges remain in maintaining patient engagement and ensuring appropriate care quality monitoring in digital mental health programs. Additional research comparing remote digital care to traditional in-person models is warranted. Studies should examine long-term outcomes, optimal care protocols, and the challenges to integrating these programs into existing healthcare systems and ensuring equitable access.