RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Medical cannabinoids are controversial. Their use is comparatively rare, but it is rising. Since 2017, cannabinoids can be prescribed in Germany for a broader range of indications. Patient surveys on these drugs are hampered by the stigmatization of cannabinoids and their (still) low prevalence in medical contexts. Against this background, patients' willingness to provide information is limited. Moreover, it is logistically challenging to reach them with a survey. A thorough knowledge of currently ongoing therapies and their effects and side effects, however, is important for a more appropriate and effective use of cannabinoids in the future. OBJECTIVE: This study is an exploratory data collection using a representative sample. The main goal is to provide a detailed picture of the current use of medical cannabinoids in Germany. It is intended to identify subgroups that may benefit particularly well or poorly. METHODS: We are conducting a representative, anonymous, cross-sectional, one-time, web-based survey based on mixed methods in 3 German federal states. Health conditions under cannabinoid therapy and before are documented with validated, symptom-specific questionnaires. This allows an estimation of the effect sizes of these therapies. The selection of parameters and questionnaires was based on the results of independent qualitative interviews in advance. Representative samples of the hard-to-reach study population are obtained by cluster sampling via contracted physicians of the statutory health insurance companies. RESULTS: Recruitment was ongoing until the end of June 2022, with 256 enrolled participants. Validated questionnaires on pain, spasticity, anorexia or wasting, multiple sclerosis, nausea or vomiting, depression, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were selected. Symptom scores are being assessed for both current conditions under cannabinoid therapy and conditions prior to this therapy (in retrospect). Validated questionnaires are also used for treatment satisfaction and general quality of life. These are supplemented by existing diagnoses, a detailed medication history, any previous experiences with cannabis or illegal substances, experiences with the prescription process, and sociodemographic data. Based on the results of the previous qualitative interviews, questions were added regarding prior experience with relaxation methods and psychotherapy, personal opinions about cannabinoids, pre-existing or symptom-related psychological trauma, and different experiences with different cannabis-based therapies. CONCLUSIONS: The exploratory mixed methods approach of this project is expected to provide valid and relevant data as a basis for future clinical research. The study design may be representative for a large proportion of outpatients treated with cannabinoids in the German federal states studied. It may have less bias toward social desirability and may provide valuable information in addition to existing studies. Due to the observational and cross-sectional nature of this study, various limitations apply. Causal relations cannot be drawn. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00023344; https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00023344. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/38814.
RESUMEN
Distress is a growing public health concern. In this three-armed randomized controlled trial, n = 102 adults with elevated stress levels and stress-related symptoms were randomly assigned to (1) "integrative" yoga classes which combined physical exercises, mindfulness training, and ethical/philosophical aspects of traditional yoga; to (2) Iyengar yoga classes which entailed primarily physical exercises; or to (3) mindfulness training without physical training. We hypothesized the synergistic effects of physical yoga exercises, mindfulness, and ethical/philosophical aspects. The primary outcome was the group difference on Cohen's Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) after 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included burnout, quality of life, physical complaints, depression, anxiety, mindfulness, interoceptive awareness, self-regulation, spirituality, mysticism, and posttraumatic stress. All outcomes were evaluated at baseline (V0), after 12 weeks (V1), and after 24 weeks (V2). A subset of participants took part in qualitative interviews. A lasting and clinically relevant stress reduction was observed within all groups (PSS ΔV0−V1Integrative Yoga = −6.69 ± 6.19; ΔV0−V1Iyengar Yoga = −6.00 ± 7.37; ΔV0−V1Mindfulness = −9.74 ± 7.80; all p < 0.00). Effect sizes were also statistically large at the end of the follow-up period (Cohen's d Integrative Yoga = 1.41; d Iyengar Yoga = 1.37; d Mindfulness = 1.23). There were no significant group differences or evidence of relevant synergistic effects from combining mindfulness and physical yoga exercises. All three interventions were found to be equally effective methods of stress reduction. Their use in practice should be based on availability and patient preference.