Knowledge, expectations and fears of cannabis use of epilepsy patients at a tertiary epilepsy center.

INTRODUCTION: Medical cannabis is increasingly discussed as an alternative treatment option in neurological diseases, e.g. epilepsy. Supporters and opponents base their propositions mostly on subjective estimates, they confuse cannabis in whole versus extracts and botanical versus synthesized. METHODS: Two hundred seventy five patients with any kind of epilepsy (56% female, 44% seizure free, 91% on medication) answered a survey on the knowledge, expectations, fears, and willingness to be treated with medical cannabis. Data were analyzed with regard to patient characteristics and clinical data from patient files. RESULTS: Overall, 70.5% of the patients were familiar with the possibility of medical cannabis treatment, 36.7% with its use in epilepsy. A minority of 10.9% gained the information from their physicians. The majority knew about organic compared to synthetic cannabis. The interest in further information is high (71.3%). Regression analysis (explaining 53.8% of the variance) indicated that positive expectations (in the order of relevance) were seizure control, relaxation, mood, and tolerability whereas fears mostly concerned addiction and delirant intoxication. Men showed a greater interest than women. CONCLUSION: Many epilepsy patients knew about medical cannabis, were interested in this treatment, and wanted more information. Expectations, however, appear to be based on the connotations of the whole substance cannabis with tetrahydrocannabidiol and its commonly known effects. Unfortunately, patients did not get their information from physicians, but mostly by other sources. In order to avoid prejudices and potentially harmful self-medication, physicians and healthcare providers are called to become familiar with the substance and to inform patients adequately.

Optimizing blood pressure control by an Information Communication Technology-supported case management (PIA study): study protocol for a cluster-randomized controlled trial of a delegation model for general practices.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal hypertension control prevents heart attacks, strokes, and other cardiovascular diseases. However, 49% of patients in German family medicine practices do not reach blood pressure (BP) targets (< 140/90 mmHg). Drawing on successful international approaches, the PIA study introduces the PIA information and communication technology system (PIA-ICT) for hypertension management in primary care. The PIA-ICT comprises the PIA-App for patients and the PIA practice management center for practices. Case management includes electronic communication with patients, recall, and stepwise medication adjustments following guidelines. The system supports a physician-supervised delegation model to practice assistants. General practitioners are qualified by eLearning. Patients learn how to obtain reliable BP readings, which they communicate to the practice using the PIA-App. METHODS: The effectiveness of the PIA-Intervention is evaluated in a cluster-randomized study with 60 practices, 120 practice assistants, and 1020 patients. Patients in the intervention group receive the PIA-Intervention; the control group receives usual care. The primary outcome is the BP control rate (BP < 140/90 mmHg) after 12 months. Using a mixed methods approach, secondary outcomes address the acceptance on behalf of physicians, practice assistants, and patients. This includes an evaluation of the delegation model. DISCUSSION: It is hypothesized that the PIA-Intervention will improve the quality of BP care. Perspectively, it may constitute an important health service model for primary care in Germany. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00012680. Registered on May 10, 2019.

Plant derived versus synthetic cannabidiol: Wishes and commitment of epilepsy patients.

PURPOSE: A special component of cannabis, cannabidiol (CBD), is currently in the focus of epilepsy treatment and research. In this context, we investigated patients' expectations and preferences pertaining to plant-derived versus synthetic formulation of cannabidiol, as well as their willingness to get this treatment. METHODS: One hundred and four of 153 patients with different forms of epilepsy (54 % female, mean age 40 ± 16 yrs.) responded to the survey. The survey consisted of 8 questions addressing expectations of and concerns towards CBD treatment, preferences of plant-derived versus synthetic CBD, estimated monthly costs, and willingness to buy CBD at one's own expense. RESULTS: The majority (73 %) of the responding epilepsy patients wished to receive plant-derived CBD; 5 % preferred synthetic CBD. Reasons for this choice were botanic origin, lack of chemistry, and the assumption of fewer and less dangerous side effects. Eighty-two percent of the patients estimated the monthly costs of CBD treatment to be below €500. Using the willingness-to-pay approach to assess the commitment of patients, 68 % could imagine buying the drug themselves. Fifty-three percent of these would be willing to pay up to €100, 40 % €100 to €200, and another 7 % €200 to €500 per month. CONCLUSION: There is an overwhelming preference towards plant-derived cannabidiol in epilepsy patients, driven by the idea of organic substances being safer and better tolerated than synthetic. The willingness-to-pay approach reflects the high burden and pressure of uncontrolled epilepsy and the expectation of relief. Non-realistic ideas of pricing as well as what patients would be willing and able to pay confirm this perception.