Cannabis dosing and administration for sleep: a systematic review.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: As cannabis is increasingly used to treat sleep disorders, we performed a systematic review to examine the effects of cannabis on sleep and to guide cannabis prescribers in their recommendations to patients, specifically focusing on dosing. METHODS: We searched EMBASE, Medline, and Web of Science and identified 4550 studies for screening. Five hundred sixty-eight studies were selected for full-text review and 31 were included for analysis. Study results were considered positive based on improvements in sleep architecture or subjective sleep quality. Bias in randomized controlled trials was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0. RESULTS: Sleep improvements were seen in 7 out of 19 randomized studies and in 7 out of 12 uncontrolled trials. There were no significant differences between the effects of tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol. Cannabis showed most promise at improving sleep in patients with pain-related disorders, as compared to those with neurologic, psychiatric, or sleep disorders, and showed no significant effects on healthy participants' sleep. While subjective improvements in sleep quality were often observed, diagnostic testing showed no improvements in sleep architecture. Adverse events included headaches, sedation, and dizziness, and occurred more frequently at higher doses, though no serious adverse events were observed. CONCLUSION: High-quality evidence to support cannabis use for sleep remains limited. Heterogeneity in cannabis types, doses, timing of administration, and sleep outcome measures limit the ability to make specific dosing recommendations.

Prior ingestion of a ketone monoester supplement reduces postprandial glycemic responses in young healthy-weight individuals.

The main objective of this study was to determine whether acute ingestion of a ketone monoester (KME) supplement impacted mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT) glucose area under the curve (AUC). Nineteen healthy young volunteers (10 males/9 females; age, 24.7 ± 4.9 years; body mass index, 22.7 ± 2.4 kg/m2) participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study. Following overnight fasting (≥10 h), participants consumed 0.45 mL/kg of a KME supplement or taste-matched placebo followed by an MMTT 15 min later. Blood samples were collected every 15-30 min over 2.5 h. KME supplementation acutely raised ß-hydroxybutyrate AUC (590%, P < 0.0001, d = 2.4) and resulted in decreases in blood glucose AUC (-9.4%, P = 0.03, d = 0.56) and nonesterified fatty acid (NEFA) AUC (-27.3%, P = 0.023, d = 0.68) compared with placebo. No differences were found for plasma insulin AUC (P = 0.70) or gastric emptying estimated by co-ingested acetaminophen AUC (P = 0.96) between ketone and placebo. Overall, results indicate that KME supplementation attenuates postprandial glycemic and NEFA responses when taken 15 min prior to a mixed meal in young healthy individuals. Future studies are warranted to investigate whether KME supplementation may benefit individuals with impaired glycemic control. Novelty: Acute ketone monoester supplementation 15 min prior to a mixed meal decreased postprandial glucose and NEFA levels without significantly impacting postprandial insulin or estimates of gastric emptying. Glucose- and NEFA-lowering effects of ketone monoester supplementation are apparently not mediated by changes in insulin release or gastric emptying.

Virtual Care for Indigenous Populations in Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand: Protocol for a Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Indigenous people in Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand experience an increased burden of chronic diseases compared to non-Indigenous people in these countries. Lack of necessary services and culturally relevant care for Indigenous people contributes to this burden. Many Indigenous communities have implemented systems, such as virtual care, to improve chronic disease management. Virtual care has extended beyond videoconferencing to include more advanced technologies, such as remote biometric monitoring devices. However, given the historical and ongoing Western intrusion into Indigenous day to day life, these technologies may seem more invasive and thus require additional research on their acceptability and utility within Indigenous populations. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to present the protocol for a scoping review, which aims to map existing evidence. This study is based on the following guiding research question: What are the characteristics of virtual care use by Indigenous adult populations in Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand? The subquestions are related to the technology used, health conditions and nature of the virtual care, cultural safety, and key concepts for effective use. METHODS: This scoping review protocol is informed by the methodology described by the Joanna Briggs Institute and is supplemented by the frameworks proposed by Arksey and O'Malley and Levac et al. A search for published and gray literature, written in English, and published between 2000 and present will be completed utilizing electronic databases and search engines, including MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Indigenous Peoples of North America, Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet, Informit, and Native Health Database. Search results will be uploaded to the review software, Covidence, for title and abstract screening before full-text screening begins. This process will be repeated for gray literature. Upon completion, a data abstraction tool will organize the relevant information into categorical formations. RESULTS: The search strategy has been confirmed, and the screening of titles and abstracts is underway. As of October 2020, we have identified over 300 articles for full-text screening. CONCLUSIONS: Previous reviews have addressed virtual care within Indigenous communities. However, new virtual care technologies have since emerged; subsequently, additional literature has been published. Mapping and synthesizing this literature will inform new directions for research and discussion. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/21860.