Unintentional Pediatric Cannabis Exposures After Legalization of Recreational Cannabis in Canada.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Myran DT
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8742190 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Introduction and Aims: Increasingly more Australians are in favor of legalizing medical and recreational cannabis use. This paper explored the personal characteristics of those who supported each of these policies in Australia. Design: Cross-sectional national survey. Methods: This study included 21,729 participants aged 18 years and above who responded to the 2016 National Drug Strategy Household Survey. Participants were provided the assurance of confidentiality for their participations. Logistic regression models were used to examine the relationships between personal characteristics and support for the legalization of medical and recreational cannabis. Results: Overall, 77 and 40% of participants supported the legalization of medical and recreational cannabis respectively. People of older age were more likely to support medical cannabis legalization while those who supported legalization of recreational cannabis use were more likely to be younger. Medical cannabis supporters were more likely to report chronic pain (OR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.04, 2.00) while recreational cannabis supporters were more likely to suffer high level of psychological distress (OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.14, 1.43). Experience with cannabis use was strongly associated with supportive attitudes, with recent cannabis users almost 14 times (OR = 14.13, 95% CI: 5.37, 37.20) and 34 times (OR = 33.74, 95% CI: 24.22, 47.01) more likely to support the legalization of medical and recreational cannabis use, respectively. Discussion and Conclusions: The majority of Australians approve the legalization of cannabis for medicinal purposes but most remain cautious about legalizing recreational cannabis use. The sociodemographic and clinical profile of supporters of medical and recreational legalization suggests a potential interaction of self-interests and beliefs about the harms of cannabis use.
| S-EPMC7947688 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7933995 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the United States (US), recreational cannabis use is on the rise. Since 2011, 11 states and the District of Columbia have legalized cannabis for adult recreational use. As additional states consider legalizing, there is an urgent need to assess associations between recreational cannabis legalization and maternal use in the preconception, prenatal, and postpartum periods-all critical windows for maternal and child health. Using cross-sectional data from the 2016 Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System, we assessed associations between state cannabis legalization and self-reported maternal cannabis use. Using logistic regression, we estimated the adjusted prevalence ratio (PR) of cannabis use during the preconception, prenatal, and postpartum period for women delivering a live-born infant in three states that had legalized recreational cannabis (Alaska, Colorado, and Washington) and three states that had not legalized (Maine, Michigan, and New Hampshire) by 2016. Our final sample size was 7258 women. We utilized 95% confidence intervals (CI) and a significance level of alpha = 0.05. After adjustment for potential confounders, women who resided in states with legalized recreational cannabis were significantly more likely to use cannabis during the preconception (PR 1.52; 95%CI ranging from 1.28-1.80; p < 0.001), prenatal (PR 2.21; 95% CI ranging from 1.67-2.94; p < 0.001), and postpartum (PR 1.73; 95%CI ranging from 1.30-2.30; p < 0.001) periods, compared to women who resided in states without legalized recreational cannabis. Although evidence about the effect of marijuana use during these periods is nascent, these findings show potential for increased incidence of child exposure to cannabis. Longitudinal research is needed to assess immediate and sustained impacts of maternal use before and after state legalization of recreational cannabis.
| S-EPMC7037220 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:On Oct. 17, 2018, Canada legalized recreational cannabis with the dual goals of reducing youth use and eliminating the illicit cannabis market. We examined factors associated with access to physical cannabis stores across Canada 6 months following legalization. METHODS:We extracted the address and operating hours of all legal cannabis stores in Canada from online government and private listings. We conducted a descriptive study examining the association between private/hybrid (mixture of government and private stores) and government-only retail models with 4 measures of physical access to cannabis: store density, weekly hours of operation, median distance to the nearest school and relative availability of cannabis stores between low- and high-income neighbourhoods. RESULTS:Six months after legalization, there were 260 cannabis retail stores across Canada: 181 privately run stores, 55 government-run stores and 24 stores in the hybrid retail system. Compared to jurisdictions with a government-run model, jurisdictions with a private/hybrid retail model had 49% (95% confidence interval 10%-200%) more stores per capita, retailers were open on average 9.2 more hours per week, and stores were located closer to schools (median 166.7 m). In both retail models, there was over twice the concentration of cannabis stores in neighbourhoods in the lowest income quintile compared to the highest income quintile. INTERPRETATION:Marked differences in physical access to cannabis retail are emerging between jurisdictions with private/hybrid retail models and those with government-only retail models. Ongoing surveillance including monitoring differences in cannabis use and harms across jurisdictions is needed.
| S-EPMC6715107 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsRecreational cannabis has been legalized in 11 states and District of Columbia (DC) in the United States. Among these, 10 states further permitted retail sale to provide a legal supply to adults. This study examined the associations of cannabis exposures with recreational cannabis legalization and commercialization.DesignSecondary data analysis of state-quarter level cannabis exposures during 2010-17 in the United States. Linear regressions with a difference-in-differences design were used to compare pre- and post-legalization trends in states that legalized recreational cannabis to contemporaneous trends in states that did not legalize recreational cannabis.SettingUnited States, including all 50 states and DC.CasesCannabis exposures reported to the US National Poison Data System.MeasurementsThe primary outcome was state age-adjusted cannabis exposures reported to the US National Poison Data System per 1 000 000 population per quarter. The two policy variables of interest included (1) the enactment of recreational cannabis legalization (i.e. removing penalties for adults' possession of cannabis in a small amount for recreational use) and (2) the initiation of recreational cannabis commercialization (i.e. providing a legal supply of cannabis to adults through licensed dispensaries).FindingsThe association between a state's enactment of recreational cannabis legalization and its changes in cannabis exposures was statistically non-significant overall. After controlling for recreational cannabis legalization, however, the initiation of recreational cannabis commercialization was associated with 5.06-5.80 more exposures per 1 000 000 population per quarter (67-77% increase relative to the pre-legalization average), depending on the composition of comparison states. The increase associated with commercialization was higher among minors than adults (7.97-9.53 versus 3.83-4.21 more exposures), higher among males than females (6.16-7.56 versus 3.76-3.91 more exposures) and higher among exposures with medical consequences than those without medical consequences (4.09-4.79 versus 0.97-1.01 more exposures).ConclusionAn increase in cannabis exposures reported to the US National Poison Data System was observed following recreational cannabis commercialization in the United States.
| S-EPMC7438241 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWith the recent legalization of recreational cannabis in Canada, cannabis-impaired driving is an important public safety concern. Our aim was to examine the association between recreational cannabis legalization and fatal motor vehicle collisions using data from the United States, which present a timely natural experiment of cannabis legalization.MethodsWe conducted an ecologic study using the number of fatal motor vehicle collisions and the associated number of deaths for US jurisdictions with legalized recreational cannabis (2007-2018) retrieved from the US Fatality Analysis Reporting System. We examined jurisdiction-specific rates of fatal motor vehicle collisions and associated deaths before and after recreational cannabis legalization using Poisson regression and meta-analyzed estimates across jurisdictions using DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models.ResultsAfter adjustment for calendar year, legalization was associated with increases in rates of fatal motor vehicle collisions (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.26) and associated deaths (IRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06-1.27). Differences between the first 12 months after legalization relative to subsequent months were inconclusive for rates of fatal motor vehicle collisions (IRR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84-1.02) and associated deaths (IRR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84-1.01).InterpretationRecreational cannabis legalization in the US was associated with a relative increased risk of fatal motor vehicle collisions of 15% and a relative increase in associated deaths of 16%, with no conclusive difference between the first and subsequent years after legalization. These findings raise concern that there could be a similar increase in fatal motor vehicle collisions and associated deaths in Canada following recreational cannabis legalization.
| S-EPMC8096392 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDespite repeated calls by medical associations to gather evidence on the harms and benefits of cannabis, there are ongoing methodological challenges to conducting observational and clinical studies on cannabis, including a high rate of patients that are lost to follow-up (LTFU). This study explores factors potentially associated with retention in a large prospective study of Canadian medical cannabis patients, with the goal of reducing the probability that patients will be lost to follow-up in future cannabis research.MethodsThe Tilray Observational Patient Study (TOPS) was a multi-site, prospective study assessing the impact of medical cannabis over 6 months in a broad population of authorized Canadian cannabis patients. The study took place from 2016 to 19, and we conducted a series of exploratory analyses including a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and logistic regressions to assess the potential association between study retention and variables including patient characteristics, cannabis and prescription drug use, quality of life, and the legalization of non-medical cannabis.ResultsOverall, 1011 participants were included in this analysis, contributing 287 patient-years of data. Retention was 728 (72%) at 3 months, and 419 (41.4%) at 6 months. Our analyses found significantly lower adjusted odds of retention following legalization (AOR 0.28, 95% CI 0.18-0.41), and in patients that used prescription opioids at baseline (AOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46-0.85), while increased odds of retention were found in patients with a higher baseline psychological score (AOR 1.43, 95% CI 1.08-1.90) or that used anti-seizure medications at baseline (AOR 1.91, 95% CI 1.30-2.81).DiscussionTOPS provided a unique opportunity to examine patient characteristics and other variables that may be associated with retention in prospective medical cannabis studies. Our findings highlight some of the challenges of conducting medical cannabis research at a time when patients have a multitude of cannabis access options, including legal adult dispensaries and a robust illicit market. High LTFU rates can impact the validity of studies, and potentially lead to misestimations of the harms and benefits of medical cannabis use. Despite being a multi-site prospective study, this was a convenience sample, thereby limiting the generalizability of these findings. Additionally, data regarding the use of cannabis was self-reported by patients, so is subject to potential recall bias.ConclusionWe found evidence that external policy changes that affect access to cannabis such as the legalization of non-medical adult use and patient characteristics associated with patient physical/psychological capacity can impact retention in prospective medical cannabis studies. Evidence-based strategies to reduce study burden on participants, such as minimizing in-person visits by providing digitized internet-based surveys and phone or telemedicine follow-up options as well as ensuring adequate participant compensation could improve retention. Additionally, policy-related changes aimed at improving access to medical cannabis, including increased cost-coverage and community-based distribution, could encourage patients to remain in the federal medical cannabis program and thereby reduce LTFU in associated studies.
| S-EPMC8320176 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhether medical or recreational cannabis legalization impacts alcohol or cigarette consumption is a key question as cannabis policy evolves, given the adverse health effects of these substances. Relatively little research has examined this question. The objective of this study was to examine whether medical or recreational cannabis legalization was associated with any change in state-level per capita alcohol or cigarette consumption.MethodsDependent variables included per capita consumption of alcohol and cigarettes from all 50 U.S. states, estimated from state tax receipts and maintained by the Centers for Disease Control and National Institute for Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, respectively. Independent variables included indicators for medical and recreational legalization policies. Three different types of indicators were separately used to model medical cannabis policies. Indicators for the primary model were based on the presence of active medical cannabis dispensaries. Secondary models used indicators based on either the presence of a more liberal medical cannabis policy ("non-medicalized") or the presence of any medical cannabis policy. Difference-in-difference regression models were applied to estimate associations for each type of policy.ResultsPrimary models found no statistically significant associations between medical or recreational cannabis legalization policies and either alcohol or cigarette sales per capita. In a secondary model, both medical and recreational policies were associated with significantly decreased per capita cigarette sales compared to states with no medical cannabis policy. However, post hoc analyses demonstrated that these reductions were apparent at least two years prior to policy adoption, indicating that they likely result from other time-varying characteristics of legalization states, rather than cannabis policy.ConclusionWe found no evidence of a causal association between medical or recreational cannabis legalization and changes in either alcohol or cigarette sales per capita.
| S-EPMC6957726 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Little is known about changes in marijuana use and cannabis use disorder (CUD) after recreational marijuana legalization (RML). Objectives:To examine the associations between RML enactment and changes in marijuana use, frequent use, and CUD in the United States from 2008 to 2016. Design, Setting, and Participants:This survey study used repeated cross-sectional survey data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2008-2016) conducted in the United States among participants in the age groups of 12 to 17, 18 to 25, and 26 years or older. Interventions:Multilevel logistic regression models were fit to obtain estimates of before-vs-after changes in marijuana use among respondents in states enacting RML compared to changes in other states. Main Outcomes and Measures:Self-reported past-month marijuana use, past-month frequent marijuana use, past-month frequent use among past-month users, past-year CUD, and past-year CUD among past-year users. Results:The study included 505?796 respondents consisting of 51.51% females and 77.24% participants 26 years or older. Among the total, 65.43% were white, 11.90% black, 15.36% Hispanic, and 7.31% of other race/ethnicity. Among respondents aged 12 to 17 years, past-year CUD increased from 2.18% to 2.72% after RML enactment, a 25% higher increase than that for the same age group in states that did not enact RML (odds ratio [OR], 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.55). Among past-year marijuana users in this age group, CUD increased from 22.80% to 27.20% (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.01-1.59). Unmeasured confounders would need to be more prevalent in RML states and increase the risk of cannabis use by 1.08 to 1.11 times to explain observed results, indicating results that are sensitive to omitted variables. No associations were found among the respondents aged 18 to 25 years. Among respondents 26 years or older, past-month marijuana use after RML enactment increased from 5.65% to 7.10% (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.16-1.40), past-month frequent use from 2.13% to 2.62% (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.08-1.41), and past-year CUD from 0.90% to 1.23% (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.08-1.71); these results were more robust to unmeasured confounding. Among marijuana users in this age group, past-month frequent marijuana use and past-year CUD did not increase after RML enactment. Conclusions and Relevance:This study's findings suggest that although marijuana legalization advanced social justice goals, the small post-RML increase in risk for CUD among respondents aged 12 to 17 years and increased frequent use and CUD among adults 26 years or older in this study are a potential public health concern. To undertake prevention efforts, further studies are warranted to assess how these increases occur and to identify subpopulations that may be especially vulnerable.
| S-EPMC6865220 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Medical marijuana use may substitute prescription opioid use, whereas nonmedical marijuana use may be a risk factor of prescription opioid misuse. This study examined the associations between recreational marijuana legalization and prescription opioids received by Medicaid enrollees. METHODS:State-level quarterly prescription drug utilization records for Medicaid enrollees during 2010-2017 were obtained from Medicaid State Drug Utilization Data. The primary outcome, opioid prescriptions received, was measured in three population-adjusted variables: number of opioid prescriptions, total doses of opioid prescriptions in morphine milligram equivalents, and related Medicaid spending, per quarter per 100 enrollees. Two difference-in-difference models were used to test the associations: eight states and DC that legalized recreational marijuana during the study period were first compared among themselves, then compared to six states with medical marijuana legalized before the study period. Schedule II and III opioids were analyzed separately. RESULTS:In models comparing eight states and DC, legalization was not associated with Schedule II opioid outcomes; having recreational marijuana legalization effective in 2015 was associated with reductions in number of prescriptions, total doses, and spending of Schedule III opioids by 32% (95% CI: (-49%, -15%), p?=?0.003), 30% ((-55%, -4.4%), p?=?0.027), and 31% ((-59%, -3.6%), p?=?0.031), respectively. In models comparing eight states and DC to six states with medical marijuana legalization, recreational marijuana legalization was not associated with any opioid outcome. CONCLUSIONS:No evidence suggested that recreational marijuana legalization increased prescription opioids received by Medicaid enrollees. There was some evidence in some states for reduced Schedule III opioids following the legalization.
| S-EPMC6318121 | biostudies-literature