Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 48
Filtrar
2.
JAMA Netw Open ; 7(7): e2423316, 2024 Jul 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39046740

RESUMEN

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic placed many physicians in situations of increased stress and challenging resource allocation decisions. Insight into the prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder in physicians and its risk factors during the COVID-19 pandemic will guide interventions to prevent its development. Objective: To determine the prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic and examine variations based on factors, such as sex, age, medical specialty, and career stage. Data Sources: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses-compliant systematic review was conducted, searching MEDLINE, Embase, and PsychInfo, from December 2019 to November 2022. Search terms included MeSH (medical subject heading) terms and keywords associated with physicians as the population and PTSD. Study Selection: Peer-reviewed published studies reporting on PTSD as a probable diagnosis via validated questionnaires or clinician diagnosis were included. The studies were reviewed by 6 reviewers. Data Extraction and Synthesis: A random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool estimates of PTSD prevalence and calculate odds ratios (ORs) for relevant physician characteristics. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome of interest was the prevalence of PTSD in physicians, identified by standardized questionnaires. Results: Fifty-seven studies with a total of 28 965 participants and 25 countries were included (of those that reported sex: 5917 of 11 239 [52.6%] were male and 5322 of 11 239 [47.4%] were female; of those that reported career stage: 4148 of 11 186 [37.1%] were medical trainees and 7038 of 11 186 [62.9%] were attending physicians). The estimated pooled prevalence of PTSD was 18.3% (95% CI, 15.2%-22.8%; I2 = 97%). Fourteen studies (22.8%) reported sex, and it was found that female physicians were more likely to develop PTSD (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.56-2.39). Of the 10 studies (17.5%) reporting age, younger physicians reported less PTSD. Among the 13 studies (22.8%) reporting specialty, PTSD was most common among emergency department doctors. Among the 16 studies (28.1%) reporting career stage, trainees were more prone to developing PTSD than attendings (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.12-1.57). Conclusions and Relevance: In this meta-analysis examining PTSD during COVID-19, 18.3% of physicians reported symptoms consistent with PTSD, with a higher risk in female physicians, older physiciansy, and trainees, and with variation by specialty. Targeted interventions to support physician well-being during traumatic events like pandemics are required.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Médicos , SARS-CoV-2 , Trastornos por Estrés Postraumático , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/psicología , Trastornos por Estrés Postraumático/epidemiología , Médicos/psicología , Médicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Prevalencia , Femenino , Masculino , Pandemias , Factores de Riesgo , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad
3.
Lancet Reg Health Am ; 36: 100815, 2024 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38974381

RESUMEN

Background: An increasing number of countries have or are considering legalizing cannabis. One concern is that legalization of cannabis will result in increased cannabis use and in turn a higher prevalence of anxiety disorders. We examined changes in emergency department (ED) visits for anxiety disorders with cannabis involvement in Ontario, over a period that involved medical and non-medical cannabis legalization. Methods: This repeated cross-sectional population-based study identified all ED visits for anxiety disorders from residents of Ontario, Canada aged 10-105 between 2008 and 2022 (n = 15.7 million individuals). We used interrupted time series analyses to examine immediate and gradual changes in cannabis-involvement and alcohol-involvement (control condition) over four policy periods: medical cannabis legalization (January 2008-November 2015), expanded medical access (December 2015-September 2018), non-medical cannabis legalization with restrictions (October 2018-February 2020), and commercialization which overlapped with the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020-December 2022). Poisson models were used to generate incidence rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Findings: Over the 14-year study, there were 438,700 individuals with one or more ED visits for anxiety disorders of which 3880 (0.89%) individuals had cannabis involvement and 6329 (1.45%) individuals had alcohol involvement. During the commercialization/COVID-19 period monthly rates of anxiety disorders with cannabis-involvement were 156% higher (0.11 vs 0.29 per 100,000 individuals) relative to the pre-legalization period, compared to a 27% increase for alcohol-involvement (0.27 vs 0.35 per 1100,000 individuals). Rates of anxiety ED visits with cannabis involvement per 100,000 individuals increased gradually over the study period with no immediate or gradual changes after expanded medical access, legalization with restrictions or commercialization/COVID-19. However, during the commercialization/COVID-19 period there were large declines in total anxiety disorder ED visits and anxiety disorder ED visits with alcohol-involvement. Consequently, during this period there was an immediate 31.4% relative increase in the proportion of anxiety visits with cannabis-involvement (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.31; 95% CI 1.05-1.65). Interpretation: We found large relative increases in anxiety disorder ED visits with cannabis involvement over a 14-year period involving medical and non-medical cannabis legalization. These findings may reflect increasing anxiety disorder problems from cannabis use, increasing self-medication of anxiety disorders with cannabis use, or both. The proportion of anxiety ED visits with cannabis involvement increased during the final period of the study but could have been the results of the market commercialization, COVID-19 or both and ongoing monitoring is indicated. Funding: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (grant #452360).

4.
BMJ Open ; 14(6): e080461, 2024 Jun 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38858148

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To determine COVID-19 vaccine uptake among physicians in Ontario, Canada from 14 December 2020 to 13 February 2022. DESIGN: Population-based retrospective cohort study. SETTING: All registered physicians in Ontario, Canada using data from linked provincial administrative healthcare databases. PARTICIPANTS: 41 267 physicians (including postgraduate trainees) who were Ontario residents and registered with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario were included. Physicians who were out of province, had not accessed Ontario Health Insurance Plan-insured services for their own care for ≥5 years and those with missing identifiers were excluded. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were the proportions of physicians who were recorded to have received at least one, at least two and three doses of a Health Canada-approved COVID-19 vaccine by study end date. Secondary outcomes were how uptake varied by physician characteristics (including age, sex, specialty and residential location) and time elapsed between doses. RESULTS: Of 41 267 physicians, (56% male, mean age 47 years), 39 359 (95.4%) received at least one dose, 39 148 (94.9%) received at least two doses and 35 834 (86.8%) received three doses of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of those who received three doses, the proportions were 90.4% among those aged ≥60 years and 81.2-89.5% among other age groups; 88.7% among family physicians and 89% among specialists. 1908 physicians (4.6%) had no record of vaccination, and this included 3.4% of family physicians and 4.1% of specialists; however, 28% of this group had missing specialty information. CONCLUSIONS: In Ontario, within 14 months of COVID-19 vaccine availability, 86.8% of physicians had three doses of a COVID-19 vaccine, compared with 45.6% of the general population. Findings may signify physicians' confidence in the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Médicos , Humanos , Ontario , Masculino , Femenino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Persona de Mediana Edad , COVID-19/prevención & control , Adulto , Médicos/estadística & datos numéricos , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos
5.
Addiction ; 119(9): 1554-1563, 2024 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38804474

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Alcohol retail access is associated with alcohol use and related harms. This study measured whether this association differs for people with and without heavy and disordered patterns of alcohol use. DESIGN: The study used a repeated cross-sectional analysis of health administrative databases. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS/CASES: All residents of Ontario, Canada aged 10-105 years with universal health coverage (n = 10 677 604 in 2013) were included in the analysis. MEASUREMENTS: Quarterly rates of emergency department (ED) and outpatient visits attributable to alcohol in 464 geographic regions between 2013 and 2019 were measured. Quarterly off-premises alcohol retail access scores were calculated (average drive to the closest seven stores) for each geographic region. Mixed-effect linear regression models adjusted for area-level socio-demographic covariates were used to examine associations between deciles of alcohol retail access and health-care visits attributable to alcohol. Stratified analyses were run for individuals with and without prior alcohol-attributable health-care use in the past 2 years. FINDINGS: We included 437 707 ED visits and 505 271 outpatient visits attributable to alcohol. After adjustment, rates of ED visits were 39% higher [rate ratio (RR) = 1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.20-1.61] and rates of outpatient visits were 49% higher (RR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.26-1.75) in the highest versus lowest decile of alcohol access. There was a positive association between alcohol access and outpatient visits attributable to alcohol for individuals without prior health-care attributable to alcohol (RR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.39-1.95 for the highest to lowest decile of alcohol access) but not for individuals with prior health-care attributable to alcohol (RR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.90-1.30). There was a positive association between alcohol access and ED visits attributable to alcohol for individuals with and without prior health-care for alcohol for ED visits. CONCLUSION: In Ontario, Canada, greater alcohol retail access appears to be associated with higher rates of emergency department (ED) and outpatient health-care visits attributable to alcohol. Individuals without prior health-care for alcohol may be more susceptible to greater alcohol retail access for outpatient but not ED visits attributable to alcohol.


Asunto(s)
Bebidas Alcohólicas , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Humanos , Masculino , Adulto , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ontario/epidemiología , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Estudios Transversales , Adulto Joven , Anciano , Niño , Bebidas Alcohólicas/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Comercio/estadística & datos numéricos , Consumo de Bebidas Alcohólicas/epidemiología , Atención Ambulatoria/estadística & datos numéricos , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos
7.
Lancet Reg Health Am ; 32: 100708, 2024 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38486811

RESUMEN

An increasing number of regions have or are considering legalising the sale of cannabis for adult use. Experience from tobacco and alcohol regulation has found that greater access to physical retail stores is positively associated with increased substance use and harm. Whether this association exists for cannabis is unclear. We completed a systematic review examining the association between cannabis retail store access and adverse health outcomes. We identified articles up until July 20, 2023 by searching four databases. We included studies examining the association between measures of cannabis store access and adverse outcomes: frequent or problematic cannabis use, healthcare encounters due to cannabis use (e.g., cannabis-induced psychosis), and healthcare encounters potentially related to cannabis (e.g., self-harm episodes). Results were compared by study design type, retail access measure, and by subgroups including: children, adolescents, young adults, adults, and pregnant individuals. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021281788). The search generated 5750 citations of which we included 32 studies containing 44 unique primary analyses (unique retail measure and outcome pairs). Studies come from 4 countries (United States, Canada, Netherlands and Uruguay). Among the included analyses, there were consistent positive associations between greater cannabis retail access and 1) increased healthcare service use or poison control calls directly due to cannabis (10/12 analyses; 83%) (2) increased cannabis use and cannabis-related hospitalization during pregnancy (4/4; 100%) and 3) frequent cannabis use in adults and young adults (7/11; 64%). There was no consistent positive association between greater cannabis retail and increased frequent cannabis use in adolescents (1/4; 25%), healthcare service use potentially related to cannabis (2/6; 33%) or increased adverse neonatal birth outcomes (2/7; 26.8%). There is a positive association between greater cannabis store access and increases in cannabis harm. In countries with legal cannabis, retail restrictions may reduce use and harm. Funding: Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction (CCSA).

8.
EClinicalMedicine ; 69: 102455, 2024 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38544799

RESUMEN

Background: There is ongoing uncertainty about whether cannabis use increases the risk of developing an anxiety disorder. In this study we estimated the risk of having an incident healthcare visit for an anxiety disorder following an emergency department (ED) visit for cannabis use and explored factors associated with increased risk. Methods: We used health administrative data to perform a population-based cohort study of all individuals aged 10-105 years with no previous healthcare visits for anxiety disorders in Ontario, Canada, between January 2008 and March 2019. We compared the risk of having an incident healthcare visit for an anxiety disorder in the ED or hospital (primary analysis) or additionally in an outpatient setting (secondary analysis) for individuals with an incident ED visit for cannabis to members of the general population using cumulative incidence functions and cause-specific hazard models adjusted for relevant confounders. Findings: Our study included 12,099,144 individuals aged 10-105 without prior care for an anxiety disorder in the ED or hospital, of which 34,822 (0.29%) had an incident ED visit due to cannabis. Within 3-years of an incident ED visit due to cannabis, 12.3% (n = 4294) of individuals had an incident ED visit or hospitalization for an anxiety disorder-a 3.7-fold (adjusted Hazard Ratio [aHR] 3.69 95% CI 3.57-3.82) increased risk relative to the general population (1.2%). In secondary analysis, further excluding individuals with prior outpatient care for anxiety disorders, 23.6% of individuals with an ED visit due to cannabis had an incident outpatient visit, ED visit, or hospitalization for an anxiety disorder within 3-years compared to 5.6% of individuals in the general population (aHR 3.88 95% CI 3.77-2.99). The risk of having an incident healthcare visit for an anxiety disorder was higher in individuals with ED visits for cannabis use compared to the general population across all age and sex strata. However, younger males with ED visits for cannabis use (aHR 5.67 95% CI 5.19-6.21) had a greater risk relative to the general population than younger women with cannabis use (aHR 3.22 95% CI 2.95-3.52). Interpretation: ED visits for cannabis use were associated with an increased risk of having an incident healthcare visit for an anxiety disorder, particularly in young males. These findings have important clinical and policy implications given the increasing use of cannabis over time and trend towards legalization of cannabis. Funding: Canadian Institutes for Health Research.

9.
J Affect Disord ; 351: 853-862, 2024 Apr 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38309479

RESUMEN

AIMS: Cannabis use may increase the risk of self-harm, but whether legalization of cannabis is associated with changes in self-harm is unknown. We examined changes in cannabis-involvement in emergency department (ED) visits for self-harm after the liberalization of medical and legalization of non-medical cannabis in Canada. METHODS: This repeated cross-sectional study used health administrative data to identify all ED visits for self-harm in individuals aged ten and older between January 2010 and December 2021. We identified self-harm ED visits with a co-diagnosis of cannabis (main exposure) or alcohol (control condition) and examined changes in rates of visits over four distinct policy periods (pre-legalization, medical liberalization, non-medical legalization with restrictions, and non-medical commercialization/COVID-19) using Poisson models. RESULTS: The study included 158,912 individuals with one or more self-harm ED visits, of which 7810 (4.9 %) individuals had a co-diagnosis of cannabis use and 24,761 (15.6 %) had a co-diagnosis of alcohol use. Between 2010 and 2021, the annual rate of ED visits for self-harm injuries involving cannabis per 100,000 individuals increased by 90.1 % (3.6 in 2010 to 6.9 in 2021 per 100,000 individuals), while the annual rate of self-harm injuries involving alcohol decreased by 17.3 % (168.1 in 2010 to 153.1 in 2021 per 100,000 individuals). The entire increase in visits relative to pre-legalization occurred after medical liberalization (seasonally adjusted Risk Ratio [asRR] 1.71 95 % CI 1.09-1.15) with no further increases during the legalization with restrictions (asRR 1.77 95%CI 1.62-1.93) or commercialization/COVID-19 periods (asRR 1.63 95%CI 1.50-176). CONCLUSIONS: Cannabis-involvement in self-harm ED visits almost doubled over 12 years and may have accelerated after medical cannabis liberalization. While the results cannot determine whether cannabis is increasingly causing self-harm ED visits or whether cannabis is increasingly being used by individuals at high risk of self-harm, greater detection for cannabis use in this population and intervention may be indicated.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Cannabis , Alucinógenos , Marihuana Medicinal , Conducta Autodestructiva , Humanos , Cannabis/efectos adversos , Estudios Transversales , Visitas a la Sala de Emergencias , Estudios Retrospectivos , Conducta Autodestructiva/epidemiología , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital
10.
JAMA Psychiatry ; 81(3): 319-320, 2024 Mar 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38265777
11.
Am J Emerg Med ; 76: 185-192, 2024 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38086185

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on unintentional pediatric poisonings is unclear. We examined changes in emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations for poisonings before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We compared changes in cannabis vs non-cannabis poisoning events given the recent legalization of cannabis in October 2018 and cannabis edibles in January 2020. STUDY DESIGN: Interrupted time-series (ITS) analyses of changes in population-level ED visits and hospitalizations for poisonings in children aged 0-9 years in Ontario, Canada (annual population of 1.4 million children), over two time periods: pre-pandemic (January 2010-March 2020) and pandemic (April 2020-December 2021). RESULTS: Overall, there were 28,292 ED visits and 2641 hospitalizations for unintentional poisonings. During the pandemic, poisonings per 100,000 person-years decreased by 14.6% for ED visits (40.15 pre- vs. 34.29 during) and increased by 35.9% for hospitalizations (3.48 pre- vs. 4.73 during). ED visits dropped immediately (Incidence Rate Ratio [IRR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.70-0.82) at the onset of the pandemic, followed by a gradual return to baseline (quarterly change, IRR 1.04, 95%CI 1.03-1.06), while hospitalizations had an immediate increase (IRR 1.34; 95% CI, 1.08-1.66) and no gradual change. The only increase in poisonings was for cannabis which had a 10.7-fold for ED visits (0.45 to 4.83 per 100,000 person-years) and a 12.1-fold increase for hospitalizations (0.16 to 1.91 per 100,000 person-years). Excluding cannabis, there was no overall increase in poisoning hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic was not associated with increases in any type of unintentional pediatric poisonings, with the exception of cannabis poisonings. Increased cannabis poisonings may be explained by the legalization of non-medical cannabis edibles in Canada in January 2020.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Cannabis , Alucinógenos , Humanos , Niño , COVID-19/epidemiología , Pandemias , Agonistas de Receptores de Cannabinoides , Ontario/epidemiología , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital
13.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(10): e2336113, 2023 Oct 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37796504

RESUMEN

Importance: The impact of adult-use cannabis legalization and subsequent commercialization (ie, increasing store and product access) on hospitalizations in Canada is unclear. Objectives: To examine changes in overall and subtypes of hospitalizations due to cannabis and associated factors following legalization in Canada and to compare changes between provinces. Design, Setting, and Participants: This repeated cross-sectional analysis included all acute hospitalizations for individuals aged 15 to 105 years in Canada's 4 most populous provinces (Ontario, Quebec, Alberta and British Columbia, population 26.9 million individuals in 2018). Data were obtained from routinely collected health administrative databases. Immediate and gradual changes in the age- and sex-standardized rates of hospitalizations due to cannabis were compared using an interrupted time series design over 3 time periods: prelegalization (January 2015 to September 2018), legalization with product and store restrictions (October 2018 to February 2020), and commercialization, which overlapped with the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020 to March 2021). Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates of hospitalizations due to cannabis per 100 000 individuals and per 1000 all-cause hospital admissions. Results: There were 105 203 hospitalizations due to cannabis over the 7-year study period, 69 192 of which (65.8%) were among male individuals, and 34 678 (33%) of which were among individuals aged 15 to 24 years. Overall, the age- and sex-standardized rate of hospitalizations increased 1.62 times between January 2015 (3.99 per 100 000 individuals) and March 2021 (6.46 per 100 000 individuals). The largest relative increase in hospitalizations was for cannabis-induced psychosis (rate ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.34 to 1.47 during the commercialization period relative to the prelegalization period). Nationally, legalization with restrictions was associated with a gradual monthly decrease of -0.06 (95% CI -0.08 to -0.03) in hospitalizations due to cannabis per 100 000 individuals. Commercialization and the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with an immediate increase of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.30 to 1.30) hospitalizations due to cannabis per 100 000 individuals. There was provincial variation in changes, with provinces with less mature legal markets experiencing the greatest declines immediately following legalization. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that legalization with restrictions was not associated with an increase in hospitalizations due to cannabis but commercialization was. The findings suggest that commercialization of cannabis may be associated with increases in cannabis-related health harms, including cannabis-induced psychosis.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Cannabis , Alucinógenos , Adulto , Masculino , Humanos , Cannabis/efectos adversos , Estudios Transversales , Pandemias , Alberta , COVID-19/epidemiología , Agonistas de Receptores de Cannabinoides , Hospitalización
14.
JAMA Psychiatry ; 80(11): 1169-1174, 2023 11 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37755727

RESUMEN

Importance: Episodes of substance-induced psychosis are associated with increased risk of developing a schizophrenia spectrum disorder. However, there are limited data on the transition risk for substance use without psychosis. Objectives: To quantify the risk of transition to schizophrenia spectrum disorder following an incident emergency department (ED) visit for (1) substance-induced psychosis and (2) substance use without psychosis and to explore factors associated with transition. Design, Settings, and Participants: A population-based retrospective cohort study (January 2008 to March 2022) of all individuals, aged 14 to 65 years, in Ontario, Canada, with no history of a psychotic disorder. Individuals with incident ED visits for substance use with and without psychosis were compared with members of the general population. Main Outcomes and Measures: Transition to schizophrenia spectrum disorder using a chart-validated algorithm. Associations between ED visits for substance use and subsequent transition were estimated using cause-specific hazard models. Results: The study included 9 844 497 individuals, aged 14 to 65 years (mean [SD] age, 40.2 [14.7] years; 50.2% female) without a history of psychosis. There were 407 737 individuals with an incident ED visit for substance use, of which 13 784 (3.4%) ED visits were for substance-induced psychosis. Individuals with substance-induced psychosis were at a 163-fold (age- and sex-adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 163.2; 95% CI, 156.1-170.5) increased risk of transitioning, relative to the general population (3-year risk, 18.5% vs 0.1%). Individuals with an ED visit for substance use without psychosis had a lower relative risk of transitioning (aHR, 9.8; 95% CI, 9.5-10.2; 3-year risk, 1.4%), but incurred more than 3 times the absolute number of transitions (9969 vs 3029). Cannabis use had the highest transition risk among visits with psychosis (aHR, 241.6; 95% CI, 225.5-258.9) and the third-highest risk among visits without psychosis (aHR, 14.3; 95% CI, 13.5-15.2). Younger age and male sex were associated with a higher risk of transition, and the risk of male sex was greater in younger compared with older individuals, particularly for cannabis use. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that ED visits for substance use were associated with an increased risk of developing a schizophrenia spectrum disorder. Although substance-induced psychoses had a greater relative transition risk, substance use without psychosis was far more prevalent and resulted in a greater absolute number of transitions. Several factors were associated with higher transition risk, with implications for counseling and early intervention.


Asunto(s)
Cannabis , Alucinógenos , Trastornos Psicóticos , Esquizofrenia , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Esquizofrenia/epidemiología , Esquizofrenia/inducido químicamente , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios Retrospectivos , Trastornos Psicóticos/epidemiología , Trastornos Psicóticos/etiología , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/epidemiología , Alucinógenos/efectos adversos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Ontario/epidemiología
15.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(9): e2331551, 2023 09 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37672273

RESUMEN

Importance: The impact of nonmedical cannabis legalization on traffic injuries and cannabis involvement in traffic injuries is unclear. Objective: To examine changes in the number and characteristics of cannabis-involved traffic injury emergency department (ED) visits from before to after legalization and subsequent commercialization (ie, increased retail store and product availability) of cannabis in Ontario, Canada. Design, Setting, and Participants: This repeated cross-sectional study examined changes in cannabis- and alcohol-involved traffic injury ED visits in Ontario, Canada, during 3 time periods: prelegalization (January 2010-September 2018), legalization with product and retail store restrictions (October 2018-February 2020), and commercialization with new products and expanded number of stores, which coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020-December 2021). All individuals aged 16 years and older eligible for Ontario's Universal Health Coverage were included. Season- and time-adjusted quasi-Poisson models were used to generate rate ratios with 95% CIs. Data were analyzed from March to April 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quarterly counts of cannabis-involved ED visits for traffic injury. Results: There were 947 604 traffic injury ED visits, of which 426 (0.04%) had documented cannabis involvement and 7564 (0.8%) had documented alcohol involvement. Of the 418 individuals with documented cannabis involvement, 330 (78.9%) were male, 109 (25.6%) were aged 16 to 21 years (mean [SD] age at visit, 30.6 [12.0] years), and 113 (27.0%) had an ED visit or hospitalization for substance use in the 2 years before their traffic injury ED visit. Annual rates of cannabis-involved traffic injury ED visits increased 475.3% over the study period (0.18 visits per 1000 total motor vehicle collisions in 2010 to 1.01 in 2021). Over the same period, alcohol-involved traffic injury ED visits increased by 9.4% (8.03 in 2010 to 8.79 per 1000 traffic injury ED visits in 2021). Legalization with restrictions was associated with a 94% increase in the quarterly rate of cannabis involvement in traffic injury ED visits relative to prelegalization (adjusted rate ratio [aRR], 1.94; 95% CI, 1.37-2.75). Commercialization/COVID-19 was associated with a greater increase of 223% in rates (aRR, 3.23; 95% CI, 2.42-4.33). After adjusting for time trends before legalization, only commercialization/COVID-19 was associated with increased rates. Male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.38; 95% CI, 2.66-4.29), living in the lowest-income neighborhood (aOR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.39-2.67), being aged 19 to 21 years (aOR, 4.67; 95% CI, 3.27-6.67), and having a prior cannabis-related ED visit (aOR, 8.03; 95% CI, 5.85-11.02) were all positively associated with cannabis involvement during a traffic injury ED visit. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found large increases in cannabis involvement in ED visits for traffic injury over time, which may have accelerated following nonmedical cannabis commercialization. Although the frequency of visits was rare, they may reflect broader changes in cannabis-impaired driving. Greater prevention efforts, including targeted education and policy measures, in regions with legal cannabis are indicated.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Cannabis , Alucinógenos , Masculino , Humanos , Femenino , Estudios Transversales , Pandemias , Agonistas de Receptores de Cannabinoides , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Etanol , Ontario
16.
Clin Toxicol (Phila) ; 61(8): 591-598, 2023 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37603042

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: An increasing number of jurisdictions have legalized recreational cannabis for adult use. The subsequent availability and marketing of recreational cannabis has led to a parallel increase in rates and severity of pediatric cannabis intoxications. We explored predictors of severe outcomes in pediatric patients who presented to the emergency department with cannabis intoxication. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, we collected data on all pediatric patients (<18 years) who presented with cannabis intoxication from August 2017 through June 2020 to participating sites in the Toxicology Investigators Consortium. In cases that involved polysubstance exposure, patients were included if cannabis was a significant contributing agent. The primary outcome was a composite severe outcome endpoint, defined as an intensive care unit admission or in-hospital death. Covariates included relevant sociodemographic and exposure characteristics. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-eight pediatric patients (54% males, median age 14.0 years, interquartile range 3.7-16.0) presented to a participating emergency department with cannabis intoxication. Fifty-two patients (38%) were admitted to an intensive care unit, including one patient who died. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, polysubstance ingestion (adjusted odds ratio = 16.3; 95% confidence interval: 4.6-58.3; P < 0.001)) and cannabis edibles ingestion (adjusted odds ratio = 5.5; 95% confidence interval: 1.9-15.9; P = 0.001) were strong independent predictors of severe outcome. In an age-stratified regression analysis, in children older than >10 years, only polysubstance abuse remained an independent predictor for the severe outcome (adjusted odds ratio 37.1; 95% confidence interval: 6.2-221.2; P < 0.001). As all children 10 years and younger ingested edibles, a dedicated multivariable analysis could not be performed (unadjusted odds ratio 3.3; 95% confidence interval: 1.6-6.7). CONCLUSIONS: Severe outcomes occurred for different reasons and were largely associated with the patient's age. Young children, all of whom were exposed to edibles, were at higher risk of severe outcomes. Teenagers with severe outcomes were frequently involved in polysubstance exposure, while psychosocial factors may have played a role.


Asunto(s)
Cannabis , Enfermedades Transmitidas por los Alimentos , Alucinógenos , Intoxicación por Plantas , Masculino , Adulto , Adolescente , Niño , Humanos , Preescolar , Femenino , Estudios Prospectivos , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Psicotrópicos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Sistema de Registros
18.
Mol Psychiatry ; 28(10): 4251-4260, 2023 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37500826

RESUMEN

A major public health concern of cannabis legalization is that it may result in an increase in psychotic disorders. We examined changes in emergency department (ED) visits for cannabis-induced psychosis following the legalization and subsequent commercialization (removal of restrictions on retail stores and product types) of non-medical cannabis in Ontario, Canada (population of 14.3 million). We used health administrative data containing the cause of all ED visits to examine changes over three periods; 1) pre-legalization (January 2014-September 2018); 2) legalization with restrictions (October 2018 - February 2020); and 3) commercialization (March 2020 - September 2021). We considered subgroups stratified by age and sex and examined cocaine- and methamphetamine-induced psychosis ED visits as controls. During our study, there were 6300 ED visits for cannabis-induced psychosis. The restricted legalization period was not associated with changes in rates of ED visits for cannabis-induced psychosis relative to pre-legalization. The commercialization period was associated with an immediate increase in rates of ED visits for cannabis-induced psychosis (IRR 1.30, 95% CI 1.02-1.66) and no gradual monthly change; immediate increases were seen only for youth above (IRR 1.63, 1.27-2.08, ages 19-24) but not below (IRR 0.73 95%CI 0.42-1.28 ages, 15-18) the legal age of purchase, and similar for men and women. Commercialization was not associated with changes in rates of ED visits for cocaine- or methamphetamine-induced psychosis. This suggests that legalization with store and product restrictions does not increase ED visits for cannabis-induced psychosis. In contrast, cannabis commercialization may increase cannabis-induced psychosis presentations highlighting the importance of preventive measures in regions considering legalization.


Asunto(s)
Cannabis , Cocaína , Abuso de Marihuana , Metanfetamina , Trastornos Psicóticos , Masculino , Adolescente , Humanos , Femenino , Cannabis/efectos adversos , Visitas a la Sala de Emergencias , Abuso de Marihuana/complicaciones , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital
19.
PLoS Med ; 20(4): e1004187, 2023 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37071611

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has exacerbated mental health challenges among physicians and non-physicians. However, it is unclear if the worsening mental health among physicians is due to specific occupational stressors, reflective of general societal stressors during the pandemic, or a combination. We evaluated the difference in mental health and addictions health service use between physicians and non-physicians, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada between March 11, 2017 and August 11, 2021 using data collected from Ontario's universal health system. Physicians were identified using registrations with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario between 1990 and 2020. Participants included 41,814 physicians and 12,054,070 non-physicians. We compared the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 11, 2020 to August 11, 2021) to the period before COVID-19 pandemic (March 11, 2017 to February 11, 2020). The primary outcome was mental health and addiction outpatient visits overall and subdivided into virtual versus in-person, psychiatrists versus family medicine and general practice clinicians. We used generalized estimating equations for the analyses. Pre-pandemic, after adjustment for age and sex, physicians had higher rates of psychiatry visits (aIRR 3.91 95% CI 3.55 to 4.30) and lower rates of family medicine visits (aIRR 0.62 95% CI 0.58 to 0.66) compared to non-physicians. During the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the rate of outpatient mental health and addiction (MHA) visits increased by 23.2% in physicians (888.4 pre versus 1,094.7 during per 1,000 person-years, aIRR 1.39 95% CI 1.28 to 1.51) and 9.8% in non-physicians (615.5 pre versus 675.9 during per 1,000 person-years, aIRR 1.12 95% CI 1.09 to 1.14). Outpatient MHA and virtual care visits increased more among physicians than non-physicians during the first 18 months of the pandemic. Limitations include residual confounding between physician and non-physicians and challenges differentiating whether observed increases in MHA visits during the pandemic are due to stressors or changes in health care access. CONCLUSIONS: The first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a larger increase in outpatient MHA visits in physicians than non-physicians. These findings suggest physicians may have had larger negative mental health during COVID-19 than the general population and highlight the need for increased access to mental health services and system level changes to promote physician wellness.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Salud Mental , Humanos , Ontario/epidemiología , COVID-19/epidemiología , Pandemias , Estudios de Cohortes , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...