Conflict of Interest Provisions in State Laws Governing Medical and Adult Use Cannabis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Bowling CM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6366528 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Conflict of Interest Provisions in State Laws Governing Medical and Adult Use Cannabis.
Bowling Candice M CM Glantz Stanton A SA
American journal of public health 20190124 3
Although the acceleration of cannabis legalization in the United States has spurred innovations in public administration and policymaking, there have been news accounts of public employees engaged in cannabis licensure or enforcement that constitute conflicts of interest (COIs). After conducting 3 surveys in 50 states (including Washington, DC as a state), we found that COI provisions pertaining to cannabis-related public employment fell into 2 categories: subject matter general and cannabis spe ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceOver the last 25 years, illicit cannabis use and cannabis use disorders have increased among US adults, and 28 states have passed medical marijuana laws (MML). Little is known about MML and adult illicit cannabis use or cannabis use disorders considered over time.ObjectiveTo present national data on state MML and degree of change in the prevalence of cannabis use and disorders.Design, participants, and settingDifferences in the degree of change between those living in MML states and other states were examined using 3 cross-sectional US adult surveys: the National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiologic Survey (NLAES; 1991-1992), the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC; 2001-2002), and the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (NESARC-III; 2012-2013). Early-MML states passed MML between NLAES and NESARC ("earlier period"). Late-MML states passed MML between NESARC and NESARC-III ("later period").Main outcomes and measuresPast-year illicit cannabis use and DSM-IV cannabis use disorder.ResultsOverall, from 1991-1992 to 2012-2013, illicit cannabis use increased significantly more in states that passed MML than in other states (1.4-percentage point more; SE, 0.5; P = .004), as did cannabis use disorders (0.7-percentage point more; SE, 0.3; P = .03). In the earlier period, illicit cannabis use and disorders decreased similarly in non-MML states and in California (where prevalence was much higher to start with). In contrast, in remaining early-MML states, the prevalence of use and disorders increased. Remaining early-MML and non-MML states differed significantly for use (by 2.5 percentage points; SE, 0.9; P = .004) and disorder (1.1 percentage points; SE, 0.5; P = .02). In the later period, illicit use increased by the following percentage points: never-MML states, 3.5 (SE, 0.5); California, 5.3 (SE, 1.0); Colorado, 7.0 (SE, 1.6); other early-MML states, 2.6 (SE, 0.9); and late-MML states, 5.1 (SE, 0.8). Compared with never-MML states, increases in use were significantly greater in late-MML states (1.6-percentage point more; SE, 0.6; P = .01), California (1.8-percentage point more; SE, 0.9; P = .04), and Colorado (3.5-percentage point more; SE, 1.5; P = .03). Increases in cannabis use disorder, which was less prevalent, were smaller but followed similar patterns descriptively, with change greater than never-MML states in California (1.0-percentage point more; SE, 0.5; P = .06) and Colorado (1.6-percentage point more; SE, 0.8; P = .04).Conclusions and relevanceMedical marijuana laws appear to have contributed to increased prevalence of illicit cannabis use and cannabis use disorders. State-specific policy changes may also have played a role. While medical marijuana may help some, cannabis-related health consequences associated with changes in state marijuana laws should receive consideration by health care professionals and the public.
| S-EPMC5539836 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceOver the last decade, cannabis has become more accessible through the proliferation of dispensaries in states that have legalized its use. Most patients using cannabis for medical purposes report getting advice from dispensaries, yet there has been little exploration of frontline dispensary staff practices.ObjectiveTo describe the practices of frontline dispensary workers who interact with customers purchasing cannabis for medical purposes and assess whether dispensary practices are associated with medicalization of state cannabis laws (degree to which they resemble regulation of prescription or over-the-counter drugs) and statewide adult use.Design, setting, and participantsThis nationwide cross-sectional survey study was conducted from February 13, 2020, to October 2, 2020, using an online survey tool. Potential respondents were eligible if they reported working in a dispensary that sells tetrahydrocannabinol-containing products and interacting with customers about cannabis purchases.Main outcomes and measuresParticipant responses to questions about formulating customer recommendations and talking to customers about risks.ResultsThe 434 survey responses from 351 unique dispensaries were most often completed by individuals who identified as budtenders (40%), managers (32%), and pharmacists (13%). Most respondents reported basing customer recommendations on the customer's medical condition (74%), the experiences of other customers (70%), the customer's prior experience with cannabis (67%), and the respondent's personal experience (63%); fewer respondents relied on clinician input (40%), cost (45%), or inventory (12%). Most respondents routinely advised customers about safe storage and common adverse effects, but few counseled customers about cannabis use disorder, withdrawal, motor vehicle collision risk, or psychotic reactions. A higher state medicalization score was significantly associated with using employer training (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.18-1.67) and physician or clinician input (odds ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.05-1.43) as a basis for recommendation. Medicalization score was not associated with counseling about cannabis risks.Conclusions and relevanceThis survey study provides insight into how frontline dispensary staff base cannabis recommendations and counsel about risks. The findings may have utility for clinicians to counsel patients who purchase cannabis, customers who want to be prepared for a dispensary visit, and policy makers whose decisions affect cannabis laws.
| S-EPMC8444019 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceLittle is known about changes in cannabis use outcomes by race and ethnicity following the enactment of recreational cannabis laws (RCLs).ObjectivesTo examine the association between enactment of state RCLs and changes in cannabis outcomes by race and ethnicity overall and by age groups in the US.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used restricted use file data from the National Surveys of Drug Use and Health between 2008 and 2017, which were analyzed between September 2019 and March 2020. National survey data included the entire US population older than 12 years.Main outcomes and measuresSelf-reported past-year and past-month cannabis use and, among people that used cannabis, daily past-month cannabis use and past-year Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition) cannabis use disorder. Multi-level logistic regressions were fit to estimates changes in cannabis use outcomes by race and ethnicity overall and by age between respondents in states with and without enacted RCLs, controlling for trends in states with medical cannabis laws or no cannabis laws.ResultsA total of 838 600 participants were included for analysis (mean age, 43 years [range, 12-105 years]; 434 900 women [weighted percentage, 51.5%]; 511 900 participants (weighted percentage, 64.6%) identified as non-Hispanic White, 99 000 (11.9%) as non-Hispanic Black, 78 400 (15.8%) as Hispanic, and 149 200 (7.6%) as other (including either Native American, Pacific Islander, Asian, or more than 1 race or ethnicity). Compared with the period before RCL enactment, the odds of past-year cannabis use after RCL enactment increased among Hispanic (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.15-1.52), other (aOR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.12-1.52), and non-Hispanic White (aOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.12-1.31) populations, particularly among those aged 21 years or more. Similarly, the odds of past-month cannabis use increased among Hispanic (aOR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.22-1.69), other (aOR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.20-1.70), and non-Hispanic White (aOR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.13-1.35) populations after RCL enactment. No increases were found in the odds of past-year or past-month cannabis use post-RCL enactment among non-Hispanic Black individuals or among individuals aged 12 to 20 years for all race and ethnicity groups. In addition, among people who used cannabis, while no increases were found in past-month daily cannabis in any racial or ethnic group, the odds of cannabis use disorder increased post-RCL among individuals categorized as other overall (aOR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.07-1.95), but no increases were found by age group.Conclusions and relevanceChanges in cannabis use by race and ethnicity that may be attributable to policy enactment and variations in recreational policy provisions should be monitored. To ensure that the enactment of recreational cannabis laws truly contributes to greater equity in outcomes and adheres to antiracist policies, monitoring unintended and intended consequences that may be attributable to recreational cannabis use and similar policies by race and ethnicity is needed.
| S-EPMC8477268 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceOpioid-related mortality increased by 15.6% from 2014 to 2015 and increased almost 320% between 2000 and 2015. Recent research finds that the use of all pain medications (opioid and nonopioid collectively) decreases in Medicare Part D and Medicaid populations when states approve medical cannabis laws (MCLs). The association between MCLs and opioid prescriptions is not well understood.ObjectiveTo examine the association between prescribing patterns for opioids in Medicare Part D and the implementation of state MCLs.Design, setting, and participantsLongitudinal analysis of the daily doses of opioids filled in Medicare Part D for all opioids as a group and for categories of opioids by state and state-level MCLs from 2010 through 2015. Separate models were estimated first for whether the state had implemented any MCL and second for whether a state had implemented either a dispensary-based or a home cultivation only-based MCL.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome measure was the total number of daily opioid doses prescribed (in millions) in each US state for all opioids. The secondary analysis examined the association between MCLs separately by opioid class.ResultsFrom 2010 to 2015 there were 23.08 million daily doses of any opioid dispensed per year in the average state under Medicare Part D. Multiple regression analysis results found that patients filled fewer daily doses of any opioid in states with an MCL. The associations between MCLs and any opioid prescribing were statistically significant when we took the type of MCL into account: states with active dispensaries saw 3.742 million fewer daily doses filled (95% CI, -6.289 to -1.194); states with home cultivation only MCLs saw 1.792 million fewer filled daily doses (95% CI, -3.532 to -0.052). Results varied by type of opioid, with statistically significant estimated negative associations observed for hydrocodone and morphine. Hydrocodone use decreased by 2.320 million daily doses (or 17.4%) filled with dispensary-based MCLs (95% CI, -3.782 to -0.859; P = .002) and decreased by 1.256 million daily doses (or 9.4%) filled with home-cultivation-only-based MCLs (95% CI, -2.319 to -0.193; P = .02). Morphine use decreased by 0.361 million daily doses (or 20.7%) filled with dispensary-based MCLs (95% CI, -0.718 to -0.005; P = .047).Conclusions and relevanceMedical cannabis laws are associated with significant reductions in opioid prescribing in the Medicare Part D population. This finding was particularly strong in states that permit dispensaries, and for reductions in hydrocodone and morphine prescriptions.
| S-EPMC6145794 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHome access to fruits/vegetables (FV) is a consistent predictor of adolescent FV intake, but many adolescents face barriers to home access.PurposeTo determine if state laws that require FV in school meals are positively associated with FV intake, particularly among students with limited home access to FV.MethodsStudent data on home food access and FV intake were obtained from the National Youth Physical Activity and Nutrition Study (n=9574) and linked to state laws regarding FV requirements for school meals. All data were collected in 2010. Ordinary least-squares models were utilized in 2012 to estimate differences in intake between states with different FV laws, overall and by whether students had access to various foods at home (FV, unhealthy snacks). Models were weighted to account for the sample design and controlled for race, gender, age, fast-food intake, and school lunches consumed per week.ResultsThe association between FV requirement laws and FV intake was strongest among students without regular home access to FV. Particularly among students who had home access to only unhealthy snacks and who regularly consumed school meals, mean FV intake was 0.45 and 0.61 cups/day higher, respectively (95% CIs=0.07, 0.84 and 0.21, 1.00), in states with FV requirements. Students with access to healthier foods at home tended to consume more FV, but such disparities in intake were smaller in states with FV laws.ConclusionsLaws that require FV in school meals may improve FV intake, particularly among students with limited access to healthy foods at home.
| S-EPMC3664760 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Attitudes towards conflict of interest (COI) and COI policy are shaped during medical school and influence both the education of medical students and their future medical practice. Understanding the current attitudes of medical students and medical school teaching faculty may provide insight into what is taught about COI and COI policy within the 'hidden' medical curriculum. Differences between medical student and medical school teaching faculty perceptions of COI and COI policy have not been compared in detail. The authors surveyed first year medical students and medical school teaching faculty at one academic medical center.The response rate was 98.7% (150/152) for students and 34.2% (69/202) for faculty. Students were less likely than faculty to agree that lecturers should disclose COI to any learners (4.06 vs. 4.31, p = 0.01), but more likely to agree that COI disclosure decreases the presentation of biased material (3.80 vs. 3.21, p < 0.001). Student and faculty responses for all other questions were not different. Many of these responses suggest student and faculty support for stronger COI policy at academic medical centers.Students and faculty perceptions regarding COI and COI policy are largely similar, but differ in terms of the perceived effectiveness of COI disclosure. This study also suggests that medical students and medical school teaching faculty support for stronger COI policy at academic medical centers.
| S-EPMC5504664 | biostudies-other
Project description:Importance:Overprescribing of opioids is considered a major driving force behind the opioid epidemic in the United States. Marijuana is one of the potential nonopioid alternatives that can relieve pain at a relatively lower risk of addiction and virtually no risk of overdose. Marijuana liberalization, including medical and adult-use marijuana laws, has made marijuana available to more Americans. Objective:To examine the association of state implementation of medical and adult-use marijuana laws with opioid prescribing rates and spending among Medicaid enrollees. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cross-sectional study used a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences design comparing opioid prescribing trends between states that started to implement medical and adult-use marijuana laws between 2011 and 2016 and the remaining states. This population-based study across the United States included all Medicaid fee-for-service and managed care enrollees, a high-risk population for chronic pain, opioid use disorder, and opioid overdose. Exposures:State implementation of medical and adult-use marijuana laws from 2011 to 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures:Opioid prescribing rate, measured as the number of opioid prescriptions covered by Medicaid on a quarterly, per-1000-Medicaid-enrollee basis. Results:State implementation of medical marijuana laws was associated with a 5.88% lower rate of opioid prescribing (95% CI, -11.55% to approximately -0.21%). Moreover, the implementation of adult-use marijuana laws, which all occurred in states with existing medical marijuana laws, was associated with a 6.38% lower rate of opioid prescribing (95% CI, -12.20% to approximately -0.56%). Conclusions and Relevance:The potential of marijuana liberalization to reduce the use and consequences of prescription opioids among Medicaid enrollees deserves consideration during the policy discussions about marijuana reform and the opioid epidemic.
| S-EPMC6145792 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess Italian medical oncologists' opinion on the implications of conflict of interest (COI) on medical education, care and research, and to evaluate their direct financial relationships.DesignNational cross-sectional survey conducted between March and April 2017 among Italian oncologists.SettingOnline survey sponsored by the Italian College of Medical Oncology Chiefs through its website.ParticipantsItalian oncologists who filled out an anonymous questionnaire including 19 items and individual and working characteristics.Main outcome measureThe proportion of medical oncologists perceiving COI as an outstanding issue and those receiving direct payments from industry.ResultsThere were 321 respondents, representing 13% of Italian tenured medical oncologists. Overall, 62% declared direct payments from the pharmaceutical industry in the last 3 years. Sixty-eight per cent felt the majority of Italian oncologists have a COI with industry, but 59% suppose this is not greater than that of other specialties. Eighty-two per cent consider that most oncology education is supported by industry. More than 75% believe that current allocation of industry budget on marketing and promotion rather than research and development is unfair, but 75% consider it appropriate to receive travel and lodging hospitality from industry. A median net profit margin of €5000 per patient enrolled in an industry trial was considered appropriate for the employee institution. Sixty per cent agree to receive a personal fee for patients enrolled in industry trials, but 79% state this should be reported in the informed consent. Over 90% believe that scientific societies should publish a financial report of industry support. Finally, 79% disagree to being a coauthor of an article written by a medical writer when no substantial scientific contribution is made.ConclusionsAmong Italian oncologists COI is perceived as an important issue influencing costs, education, care and science. A more rigorous policy on COI should be implemented.
| S-EPMC6042593 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceState cannabis laws are changing rapidly. Research is inconclusive about their association with rates of self-harm and assault. Existing studies have not considered variations in cannabis commercialization across states over time.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association of state medical and recreational cannabis laws with self-harm and assault, overall and by age and sex, while considering varying degrees of commercialization.Design, setting, and participantsUsing a cohort design with panel fixed-effects analysis, within-state changes in claims for self-harm and assault injuries before and after changes in cannabis laws were quantified in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia. Comprehensive claims data on commercial and Medicare Advantage health plan beneficiaries from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2017, grouped by state and month, were evaluated. Data analysis was conducted from January 31, 2020, to January 21, 2021.ExposuresCategorical variable that indexed the degree of cannabis legalization in each state and month based on law type (medical or recreational) and operational status of dispensaries (commercialization).Main outcomes and measuresClaims for self-harm and assault injuries based on International Classification of Diseases codes.ResultsThe analysis included 75 395 344 beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 47 [22] years; 50% female; and median follow-up, 17 months [interquartile range, 8-36 months]). During the study period, 29 states permitted use of medical cannabis and 11 permitted recreational cannabis. Point estimates for populationwide rates of self-harm and assault injuries were higher in states legalizing recreational cannabis compared with states with no cannabis laws, but these results were not statistically significant (adjusted rate ratio [aRR] assault, recreational dispensaries: 1.27; 95% CI, 0.79-2.03;self-harm, recreational dispensaries aRR: 1.15; 95% CI, 0.89-1.50). Results varied by age and sex with no associations found except for states with recreational policies and self-harm among males younger than 40 years (aRR <21 years, recreational without dispensaries: 1.70; 95% CI, 1.11-2.61; aRR aged 21-39 years, recreational dispensaries: 1.46; 95% CI, 1.01-2.12). Medical cannabis was generally not associated with self-harm or assault injuries populationwide or among age and sex subgroups.Conclusions and relevanceRecreational cannabis legalization appears to be associated with relative increases in rates of claims for self-harm among male health plan beneficiaries younger than 40 years. There was no association between cannabis legalization and self-harm or assault, for any other age and sex group or for medical cannabis. States that legalize but still constrain commercialization may be better positioned to protect younger male populations from unintended harms.
| S-EPMC7974641 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In states that have passed medical marijuana laws (MMLs), marijuana use (MU) increased after MML enactment among people ages 26 and older, but not among ages 12-25. We examined whether the age-specific impact of MMLs on MU varied by gender. Data were obtained from the 2004-2013 restricted-use National Survey on Drug Use and Health, aggregated at the state level. The exposure was a time-varying indicator of state-level MML (0 = No Law, 1 = Before Law, 2 = After Law). Outcomes included past-month MU prevalence, daily MU prevalence among past-year users (i.e., 300+ days/year), and past-year marijuana use disorder (MUD) prevalence. Linear models tested the state-level MML effect on outcomes by age (12-17, 18-25, 26+) and gender. Models included a state-level random intercept and controlled for time- and state-level covariates. Past-month MU did not increase after enactment of MML in men or women ages 12-25. Among people 26+, past-month MU increased for men from 7.0% before to 8.7% after enactment (+ 1.7%, p < 0.001) and for women from 3.1% before to 4.3% after enactment (+ 1.1%, p = 0.013). Among users 26+, daily MU also increased after enactment in both genders (men 16.3 to 19.1%, + 2.8%, p = 0.014; women 9.2 to 12.7%, + 3.4%, p = 0.003). There were no statistically significant increases in past-year MUD prevalence for any age or gender group after MML enactment. Given the statistically significant increase in daily use among past-year users aged 26+ following enactment, education campaigns should focus on informing the public of the risks associated with regular marijuana use.
| S-EPMC5934322 | biostudies-literature