Cannabis use and work-related injuries: a cross-sectional analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although the association of cannabis use with automobile accidents has been well-studied, the impact of cannabis on workplace safety and injuries is less clear. AIMS: The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between work-related injury and cannabis use in the past year. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the Canadian Community Health Survey (2013-16) of working individuals. We used multiple logistic regression modelling to calculate the odds of experiencing a work-related injury (defined as non-repetitive strain injury) among workers who reported using cannabis more than once during the prior 12 months as compared to non-users. We repeated the analysis among participants working in high injury risk occupational groups only. RESULTS: Among the 136 536 working participants, 2577 (2%) had a work-related injury in the last 12 months. Of these 2577 who had a work-related injury, 4% also reported being a cannabis user in the same period. We found no association between past-year cannabis use and work-related injury (odds ratio for work injury among users 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.66-0.99). The association was unchanged in the subgroup analysis limited to high injury risk occupational groups. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that cannabis users experienced higher rates of work-related injuries. While awaiting prospective studies, occupational medicine practitioners should take a risk-based approach to drafting workplace cannabis policies.

A systematic review of treatments for mild traumatic brain injury.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of interventions for mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) in adults as found in the literature. RESEARCH DESIGN: Systematic review of the literature. METHODS: Six electronic databases and 18 journals within the brain injury field were manually searched between the years 1980-2003. References from articles were scanned for further literature. Studies that met broad inclusion criteria were subjected to a formal test of relevance. Those found to be relevant were qualitatively tested for their methodological soundness. RESULTS: One thousand and fifty-five studies were initially identified and 163 were assessed using the relevance tool, yielding 20 studies for review. Four categories of interventions were identified: Pharmacotherapy, Cognitive Rehabilitation, Patient Education and Other. The majority of studies were weak, however there is evidence to support the effectiveness of patient education interventions. CONCLUSIONS: There are few rigorous studies evaluating treatment of MTBI. Limitations of the current literature are presented.