Perceptions in Orthopedic Surgery on the Use of Cannabis in Treating Pain: A Survey of Musculoskeletal Trauma Patients-Results From the Canadian POSIT Study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the patient-reported expectations regarding cannabis for pain following musculoskeletal (MSK) trauma and patients' perceptions and attitudes regarding its use. DESIGN: A cross-sectional retrospective survey-based study. SETTING: Three orthopaedic clinics in Ontario (Level-1 trauma center, Level-2 trauma center, rehabilitation clinic). PATIENTS SELECTION CRITERIA: Adult patients presenting to the clinics from January 24, 2018, to March 7, 2018, with traumatic MSK injuries (fractures/dislocations and muscle/tendon/ligament injury) were administered an anonymous questionnaire on cannabis for MSK pain. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Primary outcome measure was the patients' perceived effect of cannabis on MSK pain, reported on a continuous pain scale (0%-100%, 0 being no pain, and 100 unbearable pain). Secondary outcomes included preferences, such as administration route, distribution method, timing, and barriers (lack of knowledge, concerns for side effects/addiction, moral/religious opposition, etc.) regarding cannabis use. RESULTS: In total, 440 patients were included in this study, 217 (49.3%) of whom were female and 222 (50.5%) were male, with a mean age of 45.6 years (range 18-92 years, standard deviations 15.6). Patients estimated that cannabis could treat 56.5% (95% CI 54.0%-59.0%) of their pain and replace 46.2% (95% CI 42.8%-49.6%) of their current analgesics. Nearly one-third (131/430, 30.5%) reported that they had used medical cannabis and more than one-quarter (123/430, 28.6%) used it in the previous year. Most felt that cannabis may be beneficial to treat pain (304/334, 91.0%) and reduce opioid use (293/331, 88.5%). Not considering using cannabis for their injury (132/350, 37.7%) was the most common reason for not discussing cannabis with physicians. Higher reported pain severity (ß = 0.2/point, 95% CI 0.1-0.3, P = 0.005) and previous medical cannabis use were associated with higher perceived pain reduction (ß = 11.1, 95% CI 5.4-16.8, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: One in 3 orthopaedic trauma patients used medical cannabis. Patients considered cannabis could potentially be an effective option for managing traumatic MSK pain and believed that cannabis could reduce opioid usage following acute musculoskeletal trauma. These data will help inform clinicians discussing medical cannabis usage with orthopaedic trauma patients moving forward.

Data quality in a survey of registered medical cannabis users with cancer: nonresponse and measurement error.

Cannabis use among individuals with cancer is best understood using survey self-report. As cannabis remains federally illegal, surveys could be subject to nonresponse and measurement issues impacting data quality. We surveyed individuals using medical cannabis for a cancer-related condition in the Minnesota Medical Cannabis Program (MCP). Although survey responders are older, there are no differences by race and ethnicity, gender, or receipt of reduced cannabis registry enrollment fee. Responders made a more recent purchase and more recently completed an independent symptom assessment for the registry than nonresponders, suggesting some opportunity for nonresponse error. Among responders, self-report and MCP administrative data with respect to age, race, gender, registry certification, and cannabis purchase history were similar. Responders were less likely to report receipt of Medicaid than would be expected based on registry low-income enrollment eligibility. Although attention should be paid to potential for nonresponse error, surveys are a reliable tool to ascertain cannabis behavior patterns in this population.

Item response theory analysis of benefits and harms of cannabis use in cancer survivors.

Medical cannabis with cancer as a qualifying condition has become legalized in more states, but currently there are no standardized measures of perceived benefits and harms of cannabis use in cancer. This study surveyed a population-based sample of cancer survivors (n = 1539) with various types of cancer including breast (25%), prostate (17%), and gastrointestinal (11%) cancers. Item response theory analyses were used to evaluate the items for measuring perceived benefits and harms. Item response theory evaluates survey items by estimating the accuracy (analogous to reliability) and severity reflected by each item. Item response theory analyses showed all the items were accurate (reliable) measures of perceived benefits or harms. The perceived benefits items assessed beliefs well from low to high levels of perceived benefits. The perceived harms items assessed beliefs from moderate to high levels of perceived harms. The items can be used in future studies to standardize measurement while allowing some customization.

Overview of cancer patient perspectives on cannabis use during treatment.

Expanding legal access to medical cannabis across the United States increases availability and use of cannabis products to manage cancer-related symptoms and treatment side effects despite the lack of research-based evidence on its potential benefits and harms. To address knowledge gaps in how cancer patients access and use cannabis, their perceived risks and benefits with its use, and whether cancer patients discuss cannabis use with their healthcare providers during treatment, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) supported 12 NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers to conduct surveys, which included NCI standardized core questions on cannabis use during treatment, among their cancer patient populations. This overview highlights key results from the articles contained in the monograph, which includes a summary of the results of core questions across all centers and reports from individual or groups of cancer centers on survey results related to the sourcing of cannabis, associated cost, behavioral factors associated with cannabis use (such as smoking, drinking, or using other substances), patient-provider communication on cannabis use during treatment, ethnic variations in patterns, sources, and reasons for cannabis use as well as methodologic concerns related to survey data analysis. The results of these surveys of cannabis use after the diagnosis of cancer lay the groundwork for much-needed research to answer the questions of benefits and harms, including potential interactions with cancer treatments for cancer patients.

Patient-provider communication about the use of medical cannabis for cancer symptoms: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: There has been limited study regarding patient-provider communication about medical cannabis for cancer symptom management. To address this gap, this study assesses the determinants and prevalence of patient-provider communication about the use of medical cannabis for cancer symptoms at a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. METHODS: Individuals who completed cancer treatment from July 2017 to December 2019 were invited to participate in a survey regarding medical cannabis. An electronic survey was administered in English and Spanish from August to November 2021 and completed by 1592 individuals (response rate = 17.6%). RESULTS: About one-third (33.5%) of participants reported discussing medical cannabis for cancer symptom management with a health-care provider. Controlling for other factors, individuals with malnutrition and/or cachexia had higher odds (odds ratio [OR] = 2.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.50 to 3.53) of reporting patient-provider discussions compared with individuals without malnutrition and/or cachexia. Similarly, individuals with nausea had higher odds (OR = 1.94, 95% CI = 1.44 to 2.61) of reporting patient-provider discussions compared with individuals without nausea. A smaller percentage (15.6%) of participants reported receiving a recommendation for medical cannabis for cancer symptom management. Among individuals who reported using cannabis, a little over one-third (36.1%) reported not receiving instructions from anyone on how to use cannabis or determine how much to take. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our study suggests that patient-provider communication about medical cannabis for cancer symptom management is limited. As interest and use of medical cannabis continues to grow among cancer patients, there is a need to ensure patients have access to high quality patient-provider communication.

Patient out-of-pocket costs for cannabis use during cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: We assessed patient costs associated with cannabis use during cancer treatment. METHODS: Adults treated for cancer at a large, comprehensive center completed an anonymous survey regarding their thoughts and experiences with cannabis and cancer. Bivariate and weighted multivariable logistic regression assessed clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with patient-reported out-of-pocket costs for cannabis products. RESULTS: Overall, 248 cannabis users provided data on cost and were analyzed. Median monthly out-of-pocket cost for cannabis was $80 (interquartile range = $25-$150). On regression analysis, male gender (odds ratio = 2.5, 95% confidence interval = 1.2 to 5.5, P = .026) and being 45 years of age or older (odds ratio = 7.5, 95% confidence interval = 1.9 to 30.0, P = .0042) were associated with spending $100 a month or more on cannabis. Of the 166 patients who stopped using cannabis early or used less than preferred, 28% attributed it to cost and 26% to lack of insurance coverage. CONCLUSION: Cannabis use during cancer treatment may contribute to significant out-of-pocket costs, with men and younger patients more likely to pay higher costs.

A survey of patients with cancer and oncology health-care professionals about cannabis use during treatment.

BACKGROUND: This study characterizes patient and health-care professional perspectives regarding medical cannabis use at a National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Center. Data evaluated included the prevalence and patterns of and reasons for cannabis use. METHODS: Patients with cancer undergoing treatment were recruited into a cross-sectional survey as part of a national National Cancer Institute-funded effort. Participants completed a survey about cannabis use, reasons for use, and types of cannabis. A health-care professional survey was also conducted to explore perspectives regarding patients' use of cannabis. RESULTS: A total of 313 patients with cancer (mean [SD] age = 60.7 [12.8] years) completed the survey (43% response rate) between 2021 and 2022. Of the respondents, 58% were female; identified as White (61%) and Black (23%); and had diverse cancer diagnoses. Nearly half of respondents (43%) had previously used cannabis, one-quarter (26%) had used cannabis since their cancer diagnosis, and almost 1 in 6 (17%) were actively using cannabis at the time of survey completion. The most common modes of ingestion were gummies (33%) and smoking (30%). The most commonly reported reasons for use were insomnia (46%), pain (41%), and mood (39%). For the 164 health-care professionals who completed the survey (25% response rate), the majority agreed that cannabis use (72%) is safe and beneficial for patients (57%). Four in 10 (39%) health-care professionals felt comfortable providing guidance to patients about cannabis use; however, only 1 in 8 (13%) felt knowledgeable about the topic of cannabis. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one-sixth of patients with cancer receiving treatment actively use cannabis for management of various cancer symptoms. Perceptions about cannabis use and education varied widely among health-care professionals.

Perceptions, prevalence, and patterns of cannabis use among cancer patients treated at 12 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers.

BACKGROUND: The legal climate for cannabis use has dramatically changed with an increasing number of states passing legislation legalizing access for medical and recreational use. Among cancer patients, cannabis is often used to ameliorate adverse effects of cancer treatment. Data are limited on the extent and type of use among cancer patients during treatment and the perceived benefits and harms. This multicenter survey was conducted to assess the use of cannabis among cancer patients residing in states with varied legal access to cannabis. METHODS: A total of 12 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers, across states with varied cannabis-access legal status, conducted surveys with a core questionnaire to assess cannabis use among recently diagnosed cancer patients. Data were collected between September 2021 and August 2023 and pooled across 12 cancer centers. Frequencies and 95% confidence intervals for core survey measures were calculated, and weighted estimates are presented for the 10 sites that drew probability samples. RESULTS: Overall reported cannabis use since cancer diagnosis among survey respondents was 32.9% (weighted), which varied slightly by state legalization status. The most common perceived benefits of use were for pain, sleep, stress and anxiety, and treatment side effects. Reported perceived risks were less common and included inability to drive, difficulty concentrating, lung damage, addiction, and impact on employment. A majority reported feeling comfortable speaking to health-care providers though, overall, only 21.5% reported having done so. Among those who used cannabis since diagnosis, the most common modes were eating in food, smoking, and pills or tinctures, and the most common reasons were for sleep disturbance, followed by pain and stress and anxiety with 60%-68% reporting improved symptoms with use. CONCLUSION: This geographically diverse survey demonstrates that patients use cannabis regardless of its legal status. Addressing knowledge gaps concerning benefits and harms of cannabis use during cancer treatment is critical to enhance patient-provider communication.

The association of perceived cannabis risks and benefits with cannabis use since cancer diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with cancer use cannabis to help alleviate untreated cancer symptoms and side effects. METHODS: We examined associations of perceived benefits and risks and postdiagnosis cannabis use in a weighted sample of adult cancer survivors through a 1-time survey. Fifteen perceived cannabis use benefits and 19 perceived risks were operationalized as both summary scores and report of any benefits or risks. Survey-weighted logistic regression provided covariate-adjusted odds of postdiagnosis cannabis use for each benefit-risk measure. RESULTS: Among the weighted population of 3785 survivors (mean [SD] age = 62.2 [13.5] years), one-third used cannabis after diagnosis. Perceiving any benefits increased the odds of postdiagnosis cannabis use more than 500%, and perceiving any risks lowered the odds by 59%. Each SD increase in endorsed benefits doubled the odds of postdiagnosis cannabis use, while each SD increase in endorsed risks reduced the odds by 36%. CONCLUSION: An accurate understanding of benefits and risks is critical for informed decision making.

Concurrent substance use among cancer patients with and without a history of cannabis use since cancer diagnosis at an NCI-Designated Cancer Center in Florida.

BACKGROUND: Although substance use may have adverse impacts on cancer outcomes, little is known regarding patterns of concurrent substance use with cannabis among cancer patients. Our objective was to examine predictors of concurrent substance use with cannabis among cancer patients since their cancer diagnosis and explore perceptions of cannabis among these patients. METHODS: Patients treated at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center were invited to participate in an electronic survey regarding medical cannabis from August to November 2021. Survey data were linked to internal data resources including electronic health records and patient intake forms to obtain history of substance use (defined as within at least 3 months of cancer diagnosis) of cigarettes, injection drugs, high levels of alcohol, or clinically unsupervised prescription drugs (total n = 1094). Concurrent substance users were defined as those with any reported substance use and cannabis use at the time of cancer diagnosis. We used descriptive statistics (χ2 or exact tests) to compare groups and estimated adjusted odds ratios (AORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to identify predictors of substance use among users and nonusers of cannabis. RESULTS: Approximately 45% (n = 489) of the sample reported cannabis use since their cancer diagnosis. Of patients who reported using cannabis, 20% self-reported concurrent polysubstance use, while 8% of cannabis nonusers reported substance use (P < .001). Among patients who use cannabis, those who reported 2 or more self-reported treatment-related symptoms (eg, pain, fatigue) were more likely to have self-reported concurrent substance use (AOR = 3.15, 95% CI = 1.07 to 9.27) compared with those without any symptoms. Among nonusers, those with lower educational background were more likely to have a history of concurrent substance use (AOR = 3.74, 95% CI = 1.57 to 8.92). Patients who use cannabis with concurrent substance use were more likely to report improved sleep (P = .04), increased appetite (P = .03), and treatment of additional medical conditions (P = .04) as perceived benefits of cannabis use. CONCLUSIONS: High symptom burden may be associated with concurrent substance use with cannabis among cancer patients.

Illicit Cannabis Use to Self-Treat Chronic Health Conditions in the United Kingdom: Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: In 2019, it was estimated that approximately 1.4 million adults in the United Kingdom purchased illicit cannabis to self-treat chronic physical and mental health conditions. This analysis was conducted following the rescheduling of cannabis-based medicinal products (CBMPs) in the United Kingdom but before the first specialist clinics had started treating patients. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of illicit cannabis consumption to treat a medically diagnosed condition following the introduction of specialist clinics that could prescribe legal CBMPs in the United Kingdom. Methods: Adults older than 18 years in the United Kingdom were invited to participate in a cross-sectional survey through YouGov between September 22 and 29, 2022. A series of questions were asked about respondents' medical diagnoses, illicit cannabis use, the cost of purchasing illicit cannabis per month, and basic demographics. The responding sample was weighted to generate a sample representative of the adult population of the United Kingdom. Modeling of population size was conducted based on an adult (18 years or older) population of 53,369,083 according to 2021 national census data. Results: There were 10,965 respondents to the questionnaire, to which weighting was applied. A total of 5700 (51.98%) respondents indicated that they were affected by a chronic health condition. The most reported condition was anxiety (n=1588, 14.48%). Of those enduring health conditions, 364 (6.38%) purchased illicit cannabis to self-treat health conditions. Based on survey responses, it was modeled that 1,770,627 (95% CI 1,073,791-2,467,001) individuals consume illicit cannabis for health conditions across the United Kingdom. In the multivariable logistic regression, the following were associated with an increased likelihood of reporting illicit cannabis use for health reasons-chronic pain, fibromyalgia, posttraumatic stress disorder, multiple sclerosis, other mental health disorders, male sex, younger age, living in London, being unemployed or not working for other reasons, and working part-time (P<.05). Conclusions: This study highlights the scale of illicit cannabis use for health reasons in the United Kingdom and the potential barriers to accessing legally prescribed CBMPs. This is an important step in developing harm reduction policies to transition these individuals, where appropriate, to CBMPs. Such policies are particularly important considering the potential risks from harmful contaminants of illicit cannabis and self-treating a medical condition without clinical oversight. Moreover, it emphasizes the need for further funding of randomized controlled trials and the use of novel methodologies to determine the efficacy of CBMPs and their use in common chronic conditions.

Cannabis and opioid perceptions, co-use, and substitution among patients across 4 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers.

Prescription opioids are used for managing pain in persons with cancer, however, there are socioeconomic and racial disparities in medication access. Cannabis is increasingly used for cancer symptom management and as an opioid alternative. Limited data are available about patterns of opioid and cannabis use among patients with cancer. We used survey data from 4 National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers in 3 states (n = 1220) to assess perceptions, use of cannabis and opioids for pain, their substitution, and racial and ethnic differences in each outcome. Compared with White patients, Black patients were less likely to use opioids for pain (odds ratio [OR] = 0.66; P = .035) and more likely to report that cannabis was more effective than opioids (OR = 2.46; P = .03). Race effects were mitigated (P > .05) after controlling for socioeconomic factors. Further research is needed to understand cannabis and opioid use patterns and how overlapping social determinants of health create a disadvantage in cancer symptom management for Black patients.

Ethnic differences in the patterns, sources, and reasons for cannabis use among cancer patients at an NCI-Designated Cancer Center.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe patterns, sources, and reasons for cannabis use among cancer patients by ethnic group. METHODS: Data are from a cross-sectional study of 416 surveys collected via RedCap anonymously from adult cancer patients seen at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center within the last 5 years. A harmonized survey was created with 11 other National Cancer Institute centers to assess cannabis use patterns, sources, and reasons for use. Sociodemographics and cancer details were also collected via self-report. Descriptive statistics by ethnic group were compared using χ2 and Fisher exact tests. RESULTS: Among the sample (age mean = 50.4 [15.7] years; 53% male; 8.3% lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer; 46.7% Hispanic and Latinx individuals), 69.6% reported lifetime use of cannabis, 33.7% began cannabis use after cancer diagnosis, 48.1% of those consuming cannabis did not have a prescription for cannabis, and 29.4% of cannabis users consumed daily. The frequency of cannabis use (P = .04) and reasons for cannabis use (P = .02) varied by ethnic group. Sleep and pain were the most prevalent reasons for use among the Hispanics and Latinx populations; pain, mental health management, and neuropathy were the most prevalent reasons for cannabis use among non-Hispanic White individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Patterns and reasons for cannabis use differed among cancer patients by ethnic group in this exploratory cross-sectional study aimed to provide data for more rigorous study. Understanding these distinctions are pivotal in conducting more rigorous studies that address the unique needs of diverse populations utilizing cannabis for managing cancer-related symptoms.

NP student knowledge and perceptions of medical marijuana.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to measure NP students' knowledge and perception of medical marijuana (MM) and determine whether they need additional education on the topic. METHODS: A cross-sectional, descriptive study was implemented. NP students were asked to complete a survey that assessed their knowledge of MM, including adverse reactions and medical indications. Perceptions of recreational marijuana and MM were assessed through a 5-point Likert-scale questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 230 NP students who completed all or part of the questionnaire, 115 met inclusion criteria and were included in results. Most students (94%) felt that MM should be legalized in all US states. Likewise, 97% felt that MM education should be included in NP program curricula; however, only 30% reported receiving in-depth education on the topic. Participants were asked to identify, among 18 provided medical conditions, those which were approved indications for MM use; accurate response rate was low, though cancer, pain, cachexia, nausea/vomiting, posttraumatic stress disorder, and epilepsy were identified correctly as indications by more than half of participants. Previous MM use and religious affiliation had an impact on knowledge and perceptions of MM. CONCLUSION: With an increasing number of states legalizing MM, NP programs must evaluate their current curricula and integrate content that addresses the gap in knowledge of MM mechanism of action, indications, and adverse reactions.

Overview of global monitoring systems for the side effects and adverse events associated with medicinal cannabis use: a scoping review using a systematic approach.

OBJECTIVES: The use of cannabis-based medicine (CBM) as a therapeutic has surged in Australia over the past 5 years. Historically, the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961) prohibited cannabis use in Europe, the USA, the UK and Australia, leading to legislative resistance and limited preclinical data on CBM. Existing safety monitoring systems for CBM are poorly structured and do not integrate well into the workflows of busy health professionals. As a result, postmarketing surveillance is inconsistent. This review aims to evaluate international systems for monitoring CBM side effects and adverse events. DESIGN: To undertake a scoping review with a systematic approach, we used the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome (PICO) framework to develop keyword elements, and two search queries to maximise search sensitivity and specificity. DATA SOURCES: Search queries were entered into Embase and Scopus for peer-reviewed literature, and additional searches for grey literature were conducted on 23 June 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included 54 full-text articles in the review: 39 from peer-reviewed searches, 8 from grey literature and 7 from citations of relevant texts. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Our search yielded two main forms of monitoring systems: databases and registries. Out of the 24 monitoring systems identified, there were 10 databases and 14 registries, with databases often created by regulatory authorities. Systems differed in methods of causality assessment, level of detail collected, terminology and affiliations. RESULTS: Within the monitoring systems with enough published data for analysis, all except one remain active at the time of this review. VigiBase is the largest centralised monitoring system, receiving international case reports, however data heterogeneity persists. CONCLUSIONS: Our study emphasises the need for a centralised, consistent and accessible system for the postmarketing surveillance of side effects and adverse events associated with medicinal cannabis use.

Medicinal cannabis tea contains variable doses of cannabinoids and no terpenes.

Tea is a recommended way of administration of prescribed cannabis plant products in Denmark. We aimed to investigate the cannabinoid and terpene doses contained in different teas. We analysed tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA), cannabidiol (CBD), cannabidiolic acid (CBDA), and terpene concentrations in three repeated preparations of each type of tea, and in plant material. In standard tea, concentrations of THC were [median (min-max)] 9.5 (2.3-15), 19 (13-34), and 36 (26-57) µg/mL for products with a labelled content of 6.3%, 14%, and 22% total THC (THC + THCA), respectively. The CBD concentration in tea from a product labelled with 8% total CBD (CBD + CBDA) was 7.5 (1.9-10) µg/mL. Based on this, the recommended starting amount of 0.2 L of the different teas would contain between 0.46 and 11.3 mg THC, and 0.38 to 2.0 mg CBD. Adding creamer before, but not after boiling, increased the THC and CBD concentration 2.3-4.4 and 2.1-fold, respectively. Terpenes were detected in plant material, but not in tea. The study elucidates THC and CBD doses in different teas, which may assist the clinician's choice of cannabis product. Moreover, it underscores the need for caution as administration as tea can result in exposure to different doses, even when the same cannabis product is used.

Rural and urban differences in marijuana use following passages of medical marijuana laws.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding differences in post-legalization patterns of marijuana between rural and urban environments has the potential to go a long way towards targeting intervention efforts aimed at reducing marijuana use disorders. METHODS: Data come from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH, 2015-2019, N = 210,392). Survey-weighted multivariable linear and logistic regression analyses were used to assess the relationship between key marijuana-related variables and the status of medical marijuana use in each state with interaction terms for rural versus urban status. RESULTS: Among the entire sample, the prevalence of marijuana abuse and dependence were 0.7% and 1.8%, respectively. Among marijuana users, the average number of days on which marijuana was used was 131.3 (SD = 136.3) days. Those living in states with legalized medical marijuana reported use on a greater number of days (B = 10.69; 95% CI: 5.26, 16.13) with frequency of use increasing as rurality increased, compared to a core based statistical area (CBSA) of ≥1 million: a CBSA of <1 million residents (B = 23.02; 95% CI: 17.38, 28.66) and non-CBSA (B = 37.62; 95% CI: 22.66, 52.58). We also observed lower odds of driving under the influence of marijuana in states where medical marijuana was legal (aOR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.77, 0.95). CONCLUSION: We observed an increase in the frequency of marijuana use and a decrease in driving under the influence of marijuana in states with legalized medical marijuana use relative to those states where it remained illegal. We also observed key moderation based on rural-urban status. This body of results suggests that problematic marijuana use may be on the rise following the legalization of marijuana use, but also that corresponding protective attitudes exist.

Regulatory Framework for Cannabis: A Position Paper From the American College of Physicians.

Cannabis, also known as marijuana, is the dried flowers, stems, seeds, and leaves of the Cannabis sativa plant. It contains more than 100 compounds, including tetrahydrocannabinol, which has psychoactive effects. Federal law prohibits the possession, distribution, and use of cannabis outside limited research activities, but most states have legalized cannabis for medical or recreational use. However, research into the potential therapeutic and adverse health effects of cannabis has been limited, in part because of the drug's federal legal status. In this position paper, the American College of Physicians (ACP) calls for the decriminalization of possession of small amounts of cannabis for personal use and outlines a public health approach to controlling cannabis in jurisdictions where it is legal. ACP recommends the rigorous evaluation of the health effects and potential therapeutic uses of cannabis and cannabinoids as well as research into the effects of legalization on cannabis use. It also calls for evidence-based medical education related to cannabis and increased resources for treatment of cannabis use disorder.