CANNABIS LEGALIZATION IN STATE LEGISLATURES: PUBLIC HEALTH OPPORTUNITY AND RISK.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Orenstein DG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8351589 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceCannabis use disorder (CUD) is increasing among US adults. Few national studies have addressed the role of medical cannabis laws (MCLs) and recreational cannabis laws (RCLs) in these increases, particularly in patient populations with high rates of CUD risk factors.ObjectiveTo quantify the role of MCL and RCL enactment in the increases in diagnosed CUD prevalence among Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients from 2005 to 2019.Design, setting, and participantsStaggered-adoption difference-in-difference analyses were used to estimate the role of MCL and RCL in the increases in prevalence of CUD diagnoses, fitting a linear binomial regression model with fixed effects for state, categorical year, time-varying cannabis law status, state-level sociodemographic covariates, and patient age group, sex, and race and ethnicity. Patients aged 18 to 75 years with 1 or more VHA primary care, emergency department, or mental health visit and no hospice/palliative care within a given calendar year were included. Time-varying yearly state control covariates were state/year rates from American Community Survey data: percentage male, Black, Hispanic, White, 18 years or older, unemployed, income below poverty threshold, and yearly median household income. Analysis took place between February to December 2022.Main outcomes and measuresAs preplanned, International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification, ninth and tenth revisions, CUD diagnoses from electronic health records were analyzed.ResultsThe number of individuals analyzed ranged from 3 234 382 in 2005 to 4 579 994 in 2019. Patients were largely male (94.1% in 2005 and 89.0% in 2019) and White (75.0% in 2005 and 66.6% in 2019), with a mean (SD) age of 57.0 [14.4] years. From 2005 to 2019, adjusted CUD prevalences increased from 1.38% to 2.25% in states with no cannabis laws (no CLs), 1.38% to 2.54% in MCL-only enacting states, and 1.39% to 2.56% in RCL-enacting states. Difference-in-difference results indicated that MCL-only enactment was associated with a 0.05% (0.05-0.06) absolute increase in CUD prevalence, ie, that 4.7% of the total increase in CUD prevalence in MCL-only enacting states could be attributed to MCLs, while RCL enactment was associated with a 1.12% (95% CI, 0.10-0.13) absolute increase in CUD prevalence, ie, that 9.8% of the total increase in CUD prevalence in RCL-enacting states could be attributed to RCLs. The role of RCL in the increases in CUD prevalence was greatest in patients aged 65 to 75 years, with an absolute increase of 0.15% (95% CI, 0.13-0.17) in CUD prevalence associated with RCLs, ie, 18.6% of the total increase in CUD prevalence in that age group.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study of VHA patients, MCL and RCL enactment played a significant role in the overall increases in CUD prevalence, particularly in older patients. However, consistent with general population studies, effect sizes were relatively small, suggesting that cumulatively, laws affected cannabis attitudes diffusely across the country or that other factors played a larger role in the overall increases in adult CUD. Results underscore the need to screen for cannabis use and CUD and to treat CUD when it is present.
| S-EPMC9979011 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Marijuana is becoming legal in an increasing number of states for both medical and recreational use. Considerable controversy exists regarding the public health impact of these changes. The evidence for the legitimate medical use of marijuana or cannabinoids is limited to a few indications, notably HIV/AIDS cachexia, nausea/vomiting related to chemotherapy, neuropathic pain, and spasticity in multiple sclerosis. Although cannabinoids show therapeutic promise in other areas, robust clinical evidence is still lacking. The relationship between legalization and prevalence is still unknown. Although states where marijuana use is legal have higher rates of use than nonlegal states, these higher rates were generally found even prior to legalization. As states continue to proceed with legalization for both medical and recreational use, certain public health issues have become increasingly relevant, including the effects of acute marijuana intoxication on driving abilities, unintentional ingestion of marijuana products by children, the relationship between marijuana and opioid use, and whether there will be an increase in health problems related to marijuana use, such as dependence/addiction, psychosis, and pulmonary disorders. In light of this rapidly shifting legal landscape, more research is urgently needed to better understand the impact of legalization on public health.
| S-EPMC4900958 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe public health consequences of the legalization of marijuana, whether for medical or recreational purposes, are little understood. Despite this, numerous states are considering medical or recreational legalization. In the context of abrupt changes in marijuana policy in 2009 in Colorado, the authors sought to investigate corresponding changes in marijuana-related public health indicators.MethodsThis observational, ecologic study used an interrupted time-series analysis to identify changes in public health indicators potentially related to broad policy changes that occurred in 2009. This was records-based research from the state of Colorado and Denver metropolitan area. Data were collected to examine frequency and trends of marijuana-related outcomes in hospital discharges and poison center calls between time periods before and after 2009 and adjusted for population. Analyses were conducted in 2014.ResultsHospital discharges coded as marijuana-dependent increased 1% per month (95% CI=0.8, 1.1, p<0.001) from 2007 to 2013. A change in trend was detected in poison center calls mentioning marijuana (p<0.01). After 2009, poison center calls increased 0.8% per month (95% CI=0.2, 1.4, p<0.01). Poison center calls also increased 56% (95% CI=49%, 63%, p<0.001) in the period following the policy change. Further, there was one hospital discharge coded as dependent for every 3,159 (95% CI=2465, 3853, p<0.001) medical marijuana registrant applications.ConclusionsThe abrupt nature of these changes suggests public health effects related to broad policy changes associated with marijuana. This report may be used to assist in policy decisions regarding the short-term public health effects of marijuana legalization.
| S-EPMC4762755 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10370240 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8742190 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The past decade has seen unprecedented shifts in the cannabis policy environment, and the public health impacts of these changes will hinge on how they affect patterns of cannabis use and the use and harms associated with other substances.Objectives: To review existing research on how state cannabis policy impacts substance use, emphasizing studies using methods for causal inference and highlighting gaps in our understanding of policy impacts on evolving cannabis markets.Methods: Narrative review of quasi-experimental studies for how medical cannabis laws (MCLs) and recreational cannabis laws (RCLs) affect cannabis use and use disorders, as well as the use of or harms from alcohol, opioids, and tobacco.Results: Research suggests MCLs increase adult but not adolescent cannabis use, and provisions of the laws associated with less regulated supply may increase adult cannabis use disorders. These laws may reduce some opioid-related harms, while their impacts on alcohol and tobacco use remain uncertain. Research on RCLs is just emerging, but findings suggest little impact on the prevalence of adolescent cannabis use, potential increases in college student use, and unknown effects on other substance use.Conclusions: Research on how MCLs influence cannabis use has advanced our understanding of the importance of heterogeneity in policies, populations, and market dynamics, but studies of how MCLs relate to other substance use often ignore these factors. Understanding effects of cannabis laws requires greater attention to differences in short- versus long-term effects of the laws, nuances of policies and patterns of consumption, and careful consideration of appropriate control groups.
| S-EPMC6934162 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe impact of nonmedical cannabis legalization on traffic injuries and cannabis involvement in traffic injuries is unclear.ObjectiveTo examine changes in the number and characteristics of cannabis-involved traffic injury emergency department (ED) visits from before to after legalization and subsequent commercialization (ie, increased retail store and product availability) of cannabis in Ontario, Canada.Design, setting, and participantsThis repeated cross-sectional study examined changes in cannabis- and alcohol-involved traffic injury ED visits in Ontario, Canada, during 3 time periods: prelegalization (January 2010-September 2018), legalization with product and retail store restrictions (October 2018-February 2020), and commercialization with new products and expanded number of stores, which coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020-December 2021). All individuals aged 16 years and older eligible for Ontario's Universal Health Coverage were included. Season- and time-adjusted quasi-Poisson models were used to generate rate ratios with 95% CIs. Data were analyzed from March to April 2023.Main outcomes and measuresQuarterly counts of cannabis-involved ED visits for traffic injury.ResultsThere were 947 604 traffic injury ED visits, of which 426 (0.04%) had documented cannabis involvement and 7564 (0.8%) had documented alcohol involvement. Of the 418 individuals with documented cannabis involvement, 330 (78.9%) were male, 109 (25.6%) were aged 16 to 21 years (mean [SD] age at visit, 30.6 [12.0] years), and 113 (27.0%) had an ED visit or hospitalization for substance use in the 2 years before their traffic injury ED visit. Annual rates of cannabis-involved traffic injury ED visits increased 475.3% over the study period (0.18 visits per 1000 total motor vehicle collisions in 2010 to 1.01 in 2021). Over the same period, alcohol-involved traffic injury ED visits increased by 9.4% (8.03 in 2010 to 8.79 per 1000 traffic injury ED visits in 2021). Legalization with restrictions was associated with a 94% increase in the quarterly rate of cannabis involvement in traffic injury ED visits relative to prelegalization (adjusted rate ratio [aRR], 1.94; 95% CI, 1.37-2.75). Commercialization/COVID-19 was associated with a greater increase of 223% in rates (aRR, 3.23; 95% CI, 2.42-4.33). After adjusting for time trends before legalization, only commercialization/COVID-19 was associated with increased rates. Male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.38; 95% CI, 2.66-4.29), living in the lowest-income neighborhood (aOR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.39-2.67), being aged 19 to 21 years (aOR, 4.67; 95% CI, 3.27-6.67), and having a prior cannabis-related ED visit (aOR, 8.03; 95% CI, 5.85-11.02) were all positively associated with cannabis involvement during a traffic injury ED visit.Conclusions and relevanceThis cross-sectional study found large increases in cannabis involvement in ED visits for traffic injury over time, which may have accelerated following nonmedical cannabis commercialization. Although the frequency of visits was rare, they may reflect broader changes in cannabis-impaired driving. Greater prevention efforts, including targeted education and policy measures, in regions with legal cannabis are indicated.
| S-EPMC10483310 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceCivil liberty advocates typically support legalization of cannabis, which targets adult use, rather than decriminalization, which can affect both adults and youths. However, it is unknown how arrests of youths for cannabis possession change when adult use of cannabis is legalized.ObjectiveTo model changes in arrest rates of adults and youths after decriminalization and legalization of cannabis.Design, setting, and participantsThis quasi-experimental study used the publicly available Uniform Crime Reporting Program Data: Arrests by Age, Sex, and Race administrative data set to examine arrest rates in 38 states from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2016. Adult (age, ≥18 years) and youth (age, <18 years) arrests for possession of cannabis were examined. States were excluded if they did not report complete arrest data or if a policy was implemented that reduced penalties for possession of cannabis but fell short of decriminalization. Fixed-effects regression was used in an extended difference-in-differences framework. The analyses in their final form were conducted between January 17 and February 28, 2019.ExposureLiving in a state with a cannabis decriminalization policy (ie, making the penalty for cannabis possession similar to the small fine for a traffic violation) or legalization policy (ie, creating a legal supply of cannabis along with the removal of penalties for possession of a small amount of cannabis for recreational use).Main outcome and measuresState cannabis possession arrest rate per 100 000 population.ResultsData from 38 states were examined, including 4 states with cannabis legalization policies and 7 states with cannabis decriminalization policies. The adult arrest rate decreased by 131.28 (95% CI, 106.23-154.21) per 100 000 population after the implementation of decriminalization and 168.50 (95% CI, 158.64-229.65) per 100 000 population after the implementation of legalization. The arrest rate for youths decreased by 60 (95% CI, 42-75) per 100 000 population after decriminalization but did not significantly change after legalization in a state (7 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, -15 to 30).Conclusions and relevanceLegalization, as implemented through 2016, did not appear to reduce arrests for cannabis possession among youths, despite having benefited adults. The study's findings suggest that decriminalization reduces youth arrests in most cases, but these findings also suggest that any benefit for youths could be lost when adult use has also been legalized. To address this problem, it appears that state decriminalization policies should take the additional step to explicitly describe when youths can be arrested for possession of small amounts of cannabis.
| S-EPMC6580444 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The relationship between cannabis legalization and traffic safety remains unclear. Physiological measures of cannabis impairment remain imperfect. This analysis used self-report data to examine the relationship between cannabis legalization and driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC). Using a cross-sectional national sample (2016-2017) of 1,249 past-30-day cannabis users, we regressed self-reported DUIC (driving within three hours of "getting high") on cannabis legalization (recreational and medical (recreational), medical only (medical), or no legal cannabis), adjusting for demographics, days of use (past 30 days), days of use*legal status, calibration weights, and geographic clustering. The risk of DUIC in recreational (risk ratio [RR] = 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI):0.23-0.72) and medical (RR = 0.39, 95% CI:0.20-0.79) states was lower than in states without legal cannabis, with one exception. Among frequent cannabis users (≥20 days per month), there was a significantly lower risk of DUIC for those living in recreational states (RR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.49-0.99), but not for those living in medical states (RR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.60-1.24), compared to users living in states without legal cannabis. The risk of self-reported DUIC was lower in recreational and medical cannabis states compared to states without legal cannabis. The only exception was for frequent users in medical states, for whom there was no difference in risk compared to frequent users living in states without legal cannabis.
| S-EPMC9152797 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveCalcified carotid artery atheroma (CCAA) can be identified incidentally on standard dental panoramic radiographs (DPRs). We sought to (1) determine the prevalence of CCAA on DPRs in a general dental population and (2) establish the proportion of patients in whom this would represent a new statin-indicated condition.MethodsWe identified patients aged ≥30 with DPRs from 2019 to 2021 from the University of British Columbia Dental Clinic. Patient charts were reviewed for use of lipid-lowering therapies (LLT) and existing statin-indicated conditions. DPRs for each patient were evaluated for the presence and characteristics of CCAA.ResultsOf 921 patients with a DPR and documented medical history, 548 (59.5 %) were diagnostic for evaluation of CCAA. Although 116/548 (21.2 %) of these patients had evidence of CCAA, only 25.9 % (30/116) were already on LLT; another 20.7 % (24/116) of patients with CCAA had a pre-existing statin-indicated condition but were not on LLT. Therefore, in 53.4 % (62/116) of patients with CCAA-positive DPRs, this constituted a new diagnosis of atherosclerosis not yet treated with LLT, representing 6.7 % (62/921) of the clinic population and 11.3 % of individuals with DPRs of diagnostic quality (62/548). Dyslipidemia, hypertension, coronary artery disease, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, stroke/transient ischemic attack, older age, and male sex were all found to be significant predictors of CCAA.ConclusionCCAA is a common finding among patients with DPRs and in over half of cases, the presence of CCAA represents a new diagnosis of atherosclerosis. The high prevalence of new, untreated atherosclerosis in this population indicates an opportunity for risk factor modification and collaboration between dentists and physicians to optimize patient care.
| S-EPMC11350465 | biostudies-literature