ABSTRACT
CONTEXT: Studies generally focus on one type of chronic condition and the effect of medical cannabis (MC) on symptoms; little is known about the perceptions and engagement of patients living with chronic conditions regarding the use of MC. OBJECTIVES: This scoping review aims to explore: (1) what are the dimensions addressed in studies on MC that deal with patients' perceptions of MC? and (2) how have patients been engaged in developing these studies and their methodologies? Through these objectives, we have identified areas for improving future research. METHODS: We searched five databases and applied exclusion criteria to select relevant articles. A thematic analysis approach was used to identify the main themes: (1) reasons to use, to stop using or not to use MC, (2) effects of MC on patients themselves and empowerment, (3) perspective and knowledge about MC, and (4) discussion with relatives and healthcare professionals. RESULTS: Of 53 articles, the main interest when assessing the perceptions of MC is to identify the reasons to use MC (n = 39), while few articles focused on the reasons leading to stop using MC (n = 13). The majority (85%) appraise the effects of MC as perceived by patients. Less than one third assessed patients' sense of empowerment. Articles determining the beliefs surrounding and knowledge of MC (n = 41) generally addressed the concerns about or the comfort level with respect to using MC. Only six articles assessed patients' stereotypes regarding cannabis. Concerns about stigma constituted the main topic while assessing relationships with relatives. Some articles included patients in the research, but none of them had co-created the data collection tool with patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our review outlined that few studies considered chronic diseases as a whole and that few patients are involved in the co-construction of data collection tools as well. There is an evidence gap concerning the results in terms of methodological quality when engaging patients in their design. Future research should evaluate why cannabis' effectiveness varies between patients, and how access affects the decision to use or not to use MC, particularly regarding the relationship between patients and healthcare providers. Future research should consider age and gender while assessing perceptions and should take into consideration the legislation status of cannabis as these factors could in fact shape perception. To reduce stigma and stereotypes about MC users, better quality and accessible information on MC should be disseminated.
Subject(s)
Medical Marijuana , Humans , Medical Marijuana/therapeutic use , Chronic DiseaseABSTRACT
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic created an urgent need to act to reduce the spread of the virus and alleviate congestion from healthcare services, protect healthcare providers, and help them maintain satisfactory quality and safety of care. Remote COVID-19 monitoring platforms emerged as potential solutions. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the capacity and contribution of two different platforms used to remotely monitor patients with COVID-19 to maintain quality, safety, and patient engagement in care, as well as their acceptability, usefulness, and user-friendliness from the user's perspective. The first platform is focused on telecare phone calls (Telecare-Covid), and the second is a telemonitoring app (CareSimple-Covid). Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study. The data were collected through a phone survey from May to August 2020. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and t-test analysis. Participants' responses and comments on open-ended questions were analyzed using content analysis to identify certain issues and challenges and potential avenues for improving the platforms. Results: Fifty one patients participated in the study. Eighteen participants used the CareSimple-Covid platform and 33 participants used the Telecare-Covid platform. Overall, the satisfaction rate for quality and safety of care for the two platforms was 80%. Over 88% of the users on each platform considered the platforms' services to be engaging, useful, user-friendly, and appropriate to their needs. The survey identified a few significant differences in users' perceptions of each platform: empathy toward users and the quality and safety of the care received were rated significantly higher on the CareSimple-Covid platform than on the Telecare-Covid platform. Users appreciated four aspects of these telehealth approaches: (1) the ease of access to services and the availability of care team members; (2) the user-friendliness of the platforms; (3) the continuity of care provided, and (4) the wide range of services delivered. Users identified some technical limitations and raised certain issues, such as the importance of maintaining human contact, data security, and confidentiality. Improvement suggestions include promoting access to connected devices; enhancing communications between institutions, healthcare users, and the public on confidentiality and personal data protection standards; and integrating a participatory approach to telehealth platform development and deployment efforts. Conclusion: This study provides preliminary evidence that the two remote monitoring platforms are well-received by users, with very few significant differences between them concerning users' experiences and views. This type of program could be considered for use in a post-pandemic era and for other post-hospitalization clienteles. To maximize efficiency, the areas for improvement and the issues identified should be addressed with a patient-centered approach.
