Search

Background: Cannabis use disorder (CUD) treatment prevalence decreased in the US between 2002 and 2019, yet structural mechanisms for this decrease are poorly understood. We tested associations between cannabis laws becoming effective and self-reported CUD treatment., Methods: Restricted-use 2004-2019 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health included people ages 12+ classified as needing CUD treatment (i.e., past-year DSM-5-proxy CUD or last/current specialty treatment for cannabis). Time-varying indicators of medical cannabis laws (MCL) with/without cannabis dispensary provisions differentiated state-years before/after laws using effective dates. Multi-level logistic regressions with random state intercepts estimated individual- and state-adjusted CUD treatment odds by MCLs and model-based changes in specialty CUD treatment state-level prevalence. Secondary analyses tested associations between CUD treatment and MCL or recreational cannabis laws (RCL)., Results: Using a broad treatment need sample definition in 2004-2014, specialty CUD treatment prevalence decreased by 1.35 (95 % CI = -2.51, -0.18) points after MCL without dispensaries and by 2.15 points (95 % CI = -3.29, -1.00) after MCL with dispensaries provisions became effective, compared to before MCL. Among people with CUD in 2004-2014, specialty treatment decreased only in MCL states with dispensary provisions (aPD = -0.91, 95 % CI = -1.68, -0.13). MCL were not associated with CUD treatment use in 2015-2019. RCL were associated with lower CUD treatment among people classified as needing CUD treatment, but not among people with past-year CUD., Conclusions: Policy-related reductions in specialty CUD treatment were concentrated in states with cannabis dispensary provisions in 2004-2014, but not 2015-2019, and partly driven by reductions among people without past-year CUD. Other mechanisms (e.g., CUD symptom identification, criminal-legal referrals) could contribute to decreasing treatment trends., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest Dr. H. Samples has received consulting fees from the American Society of Addiction Medicine and The Pew Charitable Trusts; other authors report no potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objective: Cannabis use is associated with suicide-related outcomes in both adolescents and adults, and may be increasing amid shifting cannabis policies. However, little is known about the impact of medical marijuana legalization (MML) and recreational marijuana legalization (RML) policies on youth suicide. Using 20 years of national data, we examined associations between MML, RML, and suicide-related mortality among US individuals aged 12 to 25 years, and assessed whether they varied based on age and sex., Method: Suicide deaths (N = 113,512) from the 2000-2019 National Vital Statistics System Multiple Cause of Death files for age groups 12 to 13, 14 to 16, 17 to 19, 20 to 22, and 23 to 25 years were examined in relation to time-varying cannabis law status using a staggered adoption difference-in-difference (DiD) approach with a negative binomial regression to determine associations between MML, RML, and suicide rates, controlling for individual- and state-level covariates and accounting for the varying effective dates of MML and RML by state., Results: The overall unadjusted annual suicide rate was 10.93/100,000, varying from 9.76 (states without marijuana laws (ML)) to 12.78 (MML states) to 16.68 (RML states). In multivariable analysis, both MML (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.05-1.15) and RML (IRR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.06-1.27) were associated with higher suicide rates among female youth compared to those in states without ML. Youth aged 14 to 16 years had higher rates of suicide in states with RML compared to states with MML (IRR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.00-1.30) and states without ML (IRR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.00-1.20). Findings were consistent across sensitivity analyses., Conclusion: MML and RML were associated with increased suicide-related mortality in female youth and 14- to- 16-year-old individuals of both sexes. Mechanisms through which cannabis policies are related to increased youth suicide warrant further study and should inform legislative reform., (Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cannabis use disorder is associated with considerable comorbidity and impairment in functioning, and prevalence is increasing among adults with chronic pain. We aimed to assess the effect of introduction of medical cannabis laws (MCL) and recreational cannabis laws (RCL) on the increase in cannabis use disorder among patients in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA)., Methods: Data from patients with one or more primary care, emergency, or mental health visit to the VHA in 2005-19 were analysed using 15 repeated cross-sectional VHA electronic health record datasets (ie, one dataset per year). Patients in hospice or palliative care were excluded. Patients were stratified as having chronic pain or not using an American Pain Society taxonomy of painful medical conditions. We used staggered-adoption difference-in-difference analyses to estimate the role of MCL and RCL enactment in the increases in prevalence of diagnosed cannabis use disorder and associations with presence of chronic pain, accounting for the year that state laws were enacted. We did this by fitting a linear binomial regression model stratified by pain, with time-varying cannabis law status, fixed effects for state, categorical year, time-varying state-level sociodemographic covariates, and patient covariates (age group [18-34 years, 35-64 years, and 65-75 years], sex, and race and ethnicity)., Findings: Between 2005 and 2019, 3 234 382-4 579 994 patients were included per year. Among patients without pain in 2005, 5·1% were female, mean age was 58·3 (SD 12·6) years, and 75·7%, 15·6%, and 3·6% were White, Black, and Hispanic or Latino, respectively. In 2019, 9·3% were female, mean age was 56·7 (SD 15·2) years, and 68·1%, 18·2%, and 6·5% were White, Black, and Hispanic or Latino, respectively. Among patients with pain in 2005, 7·1% were female, mean age was 57·2 (SD 11·4) years, and 74·0%, 17·8%, and 3·9% were White, Black, and Hispanic or Latino, respectively. In 2019, 12·4% were female, mean age was 57·2 (SD 13·8) years, and 65·3%, 21·9%, and 7·0% were White, Black, and Hispanic or Latino, respectively. Among patients with chronic pain, enacting MCL led to a 0·135% (95% CI 0·118-0·153) absolute increase in cannabis use disorder prevalence, with 8·4% of the total increase in MCL-enacting states attributable to MCL. Enacting RCL led to a 0·188% (0·160-0·217) absolute increase in cannabis use disorder prevalence, with 11·5% of the total increase in RCL-enacting states attributable to RCL. In patients without chronic pain, enacting MCL and RCL led to smaller absolute increases in cannabis use disorder prevalence (MCL: 0·037% [0·027-0·048], 5·7% attributable to MCL; RCL: 0·042% [0·023-0·060], 6·0% attributable to RCL). Overall, associations of MCL and RCL with cannabis use disorder were greater in patients with chronic pain than in patients without chronic pain., Interpretation: Increasing cannabis use disorder prevalence among patients with chronic pain following state legalisation is a public health concern, especially among older age groups. Given cannabis commercialisation and widespread public beliefs about its efficacy, clinical monitoring of cannabis use and discussion of the risk of cannabis use disorder among patients with chronic pain is warranted., Funding: NIDA grant R01DA048860, New York State Psychiatric Institute, and the VA Centers of Excellence in Substance Addiction Treatment and Education., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests DSH receives support from Syneos Health for an unrelated project. JLG reports consulting fees from Hoffman-La Roche, a patent pending (use of glecaprevir and pibrentasvir for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder), and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for National Institute of Mental Health (using machine learning to optimise user engagement and clinical response to digital mental health interventions). SSM serves on the Board of Directors for the College on Problems of Drug Dependence. AJS has received consulting fees from Indivior, travel support from Alkermes, research support from MedicaSafe, and royalties from UpTo-Date. KMK has served as an expert witness in litigation. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Compared to plant/flower cannabis products, cannabis concentrates have higher average potency of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC), which may be associated with greater likelihood of cannabis-related harms. Information on factors associated with use of cannabis concentrates is needed., Methods: Respondents were 4,328 adult past-7-day cannabis users from all 50 U.S. states and Washington DC (DC) who participated in an online 2021 survey. Using logistic regression to generate adjusted odds ratios (aOR), we investigated whether participants in states that enacted recreational cannabis laws (RCL, 12 states plus DC [treated as a state], n = 1,236) or medical cannabis laws (MCL-only, 23 states, n = 2,030) by December 31, 2020 were more likely than those in states without cannabis laws (no-CL, 15 states, n = 1,062) to use cannabis concentrate products in the prior 7 days., Results: Most participants (92.4%) used plant material in the prior 7 days; 57.0% used cannabis concentrates. In RCL, MCL and no-CL states, concentrate use was reported by 61.5%, 56.6%, and 52.5%, respectively. Compared to participants in no-CL states, odds of using cannabis concentrate products were greater among those in RCL states (aOR = 1.47; CI = 1.17-1.84) and MCL-only states (aOR = 1.29; CI = 1.08-1.55). Whether states had legally-authorized dispensaries had little effect on results., Conclusion: Results suggest that individuals in MCL-only and RCL states are more likely to use cannabis concentrate products. Determining mechanisms underlying these results, e.g., commercialization, could provide important information for prevention. Clinicians should be alert to patient use of concentrates, especially in MCL-only and RCL states. Continued monitoring is warranted as additional states legalize cannabis use., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Simultaneous cannabis/alcohol use, using both substances within a short time interval so that their effects overlap, has a greater risk of potential negative consequences than single-substance use and is more common in younger age. Relationships between recreational cannabis laws (RCLs) and changes in simultaneous cannabis/alcohol use prevalence remain untested., Objective: To examine trends in simultaneous cannabis/alcohol use from 2008 to 2019, and investigate associations between implementation of RCLs (i.e., presence of active legal dispensaries or legal home cultivation) and simultaneous cannabis/alcohol use in the United States (U.S.)., Design: Repeated cross-sectional samples from the 2008-2019 U.S. National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH)., Participants: Respondents (51% female) aged 12 and older., Interventions: Changes in simultaneous cannabis/alcohol use before and after RCL implementation (controlling for medical cannabis law implementation) were compared in different age groups (12-20, 21-30, 31-40, 41-50, 51+), using adjusted multi-level logistic regression with state random intercepts and an RCL/age group interaction., Measurements: Self-reported simultaneous cannabis/alcohol use., Results: From 2008 to 2019, the overall prevalence of simultaneous cannabis/alcohol use declined among those aged 12-20 but increased in adults aged 21+. Model-based simultaneous cannabis/alcohol use prevalence increased after RCL implementation among respondents aged 21-30 years (+1.2%; aOR= 1.15 [95%CI = 1.04-1.27]), 31-40 years (+1.0; 1.15 [1.04-1.27]), and 41-50 years (+1.75; 1.63 [1.34-1.98]), but not in individuals aged <21 or 51+ years., Conclusions: Implementation of recreational cannabis policies resulted in increased simultaneous use of cannabis and alcohol, supporting the complementarity hypothesis, but only among adults aged 21+. Efforts to minimize harms related to simultaneous cannabis/alcohol use are critical, especially in states with RCLs. Future studies should investigate cultural norms, perceived harm, and motives related to simultaneous use., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Importance: Cannabis 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., Objective: To 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 Participants: Staggered-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 Measures: As preplanned, International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification, ninth and tenth revisions, CUD diagnoses from electronic health records were analyzed., Results: The 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 Relevance: In 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.

Abstract: Chronic pain is associated with mental and physical health difficulties and is prevalent among veterans. Cannabis has been put forth as a treatment for chronic pain, and changes in laws, attitudes, and use patterns have occurred over the past 2 decades. Differences in prevalence of nonmedical cannabis use and cannabis use disorder (CUD) were examined across 2 groups: veterans or nonveterans and those reporting or not reporting recent pain. Data from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (2012-2013; n = 36,309) were analyzed using logistic regression. Prevalence differences (PDs) for 3 cannabis outcomes (1) past-year nonmedical cannabis use, (2) frequent (≥3 times a week) nonmedical use, and (3) DSM-5 CUD were estimated for those reporting recent moderate to severe pain (veterans or nonveterans) and veterans reporting or not reporting recent pain. Difference in differences was calculated to investigate PDs on outcomes associated with residence in a state with medical cannabis laws (MCLs). Associations between physical and mental health and cannabis variables were tested. The results indicated that the prevalence of recent pain was greater among veterans (PD = 7.25%, 95% confidence interval (CI) [4.90-9.60]). Among veterans, the prevalence of frequent cannabis use was greater among those with pain (PD = 1.92%, 98% CI [0.21-3.63]), and among veterans residing in a state with MCLs, the prevalence of CUD was greater among those reporting recent pain (PD = 3.88%, 98% CI [0.36-7.39]). Findings failed to support the hypothesis that cannabis use improves mental or physical health for veterans with pain. Providers treating veterans with pain in MCL states should monitor such patients closely for CUD., (Copyright © 2021 International Association for the Study of Pain.)

Objective: The authors sought to estimate the prevalence of past-12-month and lifetime cannabis use and cannabis use disorder among U.S. veterans; to describe demographic, substance use disorder, and psychiatric disorder correlates of nonmedical cannabis use and cannabis use disorder; and to explore differences in cannabis use and cannabis use disorder prevalence among veterans in states with and without medical marijuana laws., Methods: Participants were 3,119 respondents in the 2012-2013 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (NESARC-III) who identified as U.S. veterans. Weighted prevalences were calculated. Logistic regression analyses tested associations of nonmedical cannabis use and cannabis use disorder with demographic and clinical correlates and examined whether prevalence differed by state legalization status., Results: The prevalences of any past-12-month cannabis use and cannabis use disorder were 7.3% and 1.8%, respectively. Lifetime prevalences were 32.5% and 5.7%, respectively. Past-12-month and lifetime cannabis use disorder prevalence estimates among nonmedical cannabis users were 24.4% and 17.4%, respectively. Sociodemographic correlates of nonmedical cannabis use and use disorder included younger age, male gender, being unmarried, lower income, and residing in a state with medical marijuana laws. Nonmedical cannabis use and use disorder were associated with most psychiatric and substance use disorders examined., Conclusions: Among veterans, the odds of nonmedical cannabis use and use disorder were elevated among vulnerable subgroups, including those with lower income or psychiatric disorders and among survey participants residing in states with medical marijuana laws. The study findings highlight the need for clinical attention (e.g., screening, assessment) and ongoing monitoring among veterans in the context of increasing legalization of cannabis.

Background: Highly-potent cannabis products, e.g., concentrates, entail greater risks of cannabis-related harms than lower-potency products such as plant or flower material. However, little information is available on whether individuals in U.S. states with recreational cannabis laws (RCL) or medical cannabis laws (MCL) are more likely than individuals in U.S. states without cannabis legalization (no-CL) to use highly-potent forms of cannabis., Methods: Cannabis-using adults in a 2017 online survey (N = 4064) provided information on state of residence and past-month cannabis use, including types of products used, categorized as low-potency (smoked or vaped plant cannabis) or high-potency (vaping or dabbing concentrates). Multivariable logistic regression models generated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for use of high-potency cannabis products by state cannabis legalization status (RCL, MCL, no-CL)., Results: Compared to participants in no-CL states, participants in RCL states had greater odds of using high-potency concentrate products (aOR=2.61;CI=1.77-3.86), as did participants in MCL-only states (aOR=1.55;CI=1.21-1.97). When participants in RCL states and MCL states were directly compared, those in RCL states had greater odds of using high-potency concentrate products (aOR=1.69;CI=1.27-2.42)., Discussion: Although the sample was not nationally representative and the cross-sectional data precluded determining the direction of effect, results suggest that use of high-potency cannabis concentrates is more likely among those in RCL states. Clinicians in RCL states should screen cannabis users for harmful patterns of use. Policymakers in states that do not yet have RCL should consider these findings when drafting new cannabis laws, including the specific products permitted and how best to regulate them., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Little is known on how perceived availability of marijuana is associated with medical marijuana laws. We examined the relationship between medical marijuana laws (MML) and the prevalence of past-month marijuana use, with perceived availability of marijuana., Methods: Data were from respondents included in the National Survey of Drug Use and Health restricted use data portal 2004-2013. Multilevel logistic regression of individual-level data was used to test differences between MML and non-MML states and changes in prevalence of past-month marijuana use and perceived availability from before to after passage of MML among adolescents, young adults and older adults controlling for demographics., Results: Among adults 26+, past-month prevalence of marijuana use increased from 5.87% to 7.15% after MML passage (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR): 1.24 [1.16-1.31]), but no change in prevalence of use was found for 12-17 or 18-25 year-olds. Perceived availability of marijuana increased after MML was enacted among those 26+ but not in younger groups. Among all age groups, prevalence of marijuana use and perception of it being easily available was higher in states that would eventually pass MML by 2013 compared to those that had not. Perceived availability was significantly associated with increased risk of past-month marijuana use in all age groups., Conclusion: Evidence suggests perceived availability as a driver of change in use of marijuana due to MML. To date, this has only occurred in adults 26+ and different scenarios that could explain this change need to be further explored., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflict of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

There is considerable interest in the effects of medical marijuana laws (MML) on marijuana use in the USA, particularly among youth. The article by Stolzenberg et al. (2015) "The effect of medical cannabis laws on juvenile cannabis use" concludes that "implementation of medical cannabis laws increase juvenile cannabis use". This result is opposite to the findings of other studies that analysed the same US National Survey on Drug Use in Households data as well as opposite to studies analysing other national data which show no increase or even a decrease in youth marijuana use after the passage of MML. We provide a replication of the Stolzenberg et al. results and demonstrate how the comparison they are making is actually driven by differences between states with and without MML rather than being driven by pre and post-MML changes within states. We show that Stolzenberg et al. do not properly control for the fact that states that pass MML during 2002-2011 tend to already have higher past-month marijuana use before passing the MML in the first place. We further show that when within-state changes are properly considered and pre-MML prevalence is properly controlled, there is no evidence of a differential increase in past-month marijuana use in youth that can be attributed to state MML., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: The Veterans Health Administration tracks urine drug tests (UDTs) among patients on long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) and recommends discussing the health effects of cannabis use. Objective: To determine the occurrence of cannabis-related discussions between providers and patients on LTOT during six months following UDT positive for cannabis, and examine factors associated with documenting cannabis use. Design: We identified patients prescribed LTOT with a UDT positive for cannabis in 2019. We developed a text-processing tool to extract discussions around cannabis use from their charts. Subjects: Twelve thousand seventy patients were included. Chart review was conducted on a random sample of 1,946 patients. Main measures: The presence of a cannabis term in the chart suggesting documented cannabis use or cannabis-related discussions. Content of those discussions was extracted in a subset of patients. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between patient factors, including state of residence legal status, with documentation of cannabis use. Key Results: Among the 12,070 patients, 65.8% (N = 7,948) had a cannabis term, whereas 34.1% (N = 4,122) of patients lacked a cannabis term, suggesting that no documentation of cannabis use or discussion between provider and patient took place. Among the subset of patients who had a discussion documented, 47% related to cannabis use for medical reasons, 35% related to a discussion of VA policy or legal issues, and 17% related to a discussion specific to medical risks or harm reduction strategies. In adjusted analyses, residents of states with legalized recreational cannabis were less likely to have any cannabis-related discussion compared to patients in non-legal states [OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.64–0.82]. Conclusions: One-third of LTOT patients did not have documentation of cannabis use in the chart in the 6 months following a positive UDT for cannabis. Discussions related to the medical risks of cannabis use or harm reduction strategies were uncommon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The authors sought to determine the association of cannabis indicators with self-reported psychotic disorders in the U.S. general population.Methods: Participants were from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC; 2001-2002; N=43,093) and NESARC-III (2012-2013; N=36,309). Logistic regression was used to estimate standardized prevalences of past-year self-reported psychotic disorders within each survey and to evaluate the association of past-year self-reported psychotic disorders with indicators of nonmedical cannabis use (any use; frequent use [at least three times/week], daily/near-daily use, and DSM-IV cannabis use disorder) compared with those with no past-year nonmedical cannabis use. Whether the strength of associations differed between surveys was indicated by difference-in-difference tests (between-survey contrasts) and ratios of odds ratios between surveys.Results: Self-reported psychotic disorders were significantly more prevalent among participants with any nonmedical cannabis use than those without (2001-2002: 1.65% compared with 0.27%; 2012-2013: 1.89% compared with 0.68%). In 2001-2002, self-reported psychotic disorders were unrelated to either frequent use or daily/near-daily use. However, in 2012 - 2013, compared with nonusers, self-reported psychotic disorders were more common among participants with frequent use and those with daily/near-daily nonmedical cannabis use (2012-2013: 2.79% and 2.52%, respectively, compared with 0.68% among nonusers). Self-reported psychotic disorders were significantly more prevalent among participants with cannabis use disorder than nonusers in both surveys (2001-2002: 2.55% compared with 0.27%; 2012 - 2013: 3.38% compared with 0.68%). The strength of these associations did not change over time.Conclusions: Data from the U.S. general population, especially more recent data, suggest associations between self-reported psychotic disorder and frequent nonmedical cannabis use and cannabis use disorder. Clinicians and policy makers should consider these relationships when monitoring patients and formulating programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Given changes in U.S. marijuana laws, attitudes, and use patterns, individuals with pain may be an emerging group at risk for nonmedical cannabis use and cannabis use disorder. The authors examined differences in the prevalence of nonmedical cannabis use and cannabis use disorder among U.S. adults with and without pain, as well as whether these differences widened over time.Methods: Data from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC, 2001-2002; N=43,093) and NESARC-III (2012-2013; N=36,309) were analyzed using logistic regression. Risk differences of past-year nonmedical cannabis use, frequent (at least three times a week) nonmedical use, and DSM-IV cannabis use disorder were estimated for groups with and without moderate to severe pain, and these risk differences were tested for change over time.Results: Any nonmedical cannabis use was more prevalent in respondents with than without pain (2001-2002: 5.15% compared with 3.74%; 2012-2013: 12.42% compared with 9.02%), a risk difference significantly greater in the 2012-2013 data than in the 2001-2002 data. The prevalence of frequent nonmedical cannabis use did not differ by pain status in the 2001-2002 survey, but was significantly more prevalent in those with than without pain in the 2012-2013 survey (5.03% compared with 3.45%). Cannabis use disorder was more prevalent in respondents with than without pain (2001-2002: 1.77% compared with 1.35%; 2012-2013: 4.18% compared with 2.74%), a significantly greater risk difference in the data from 2012-2013 than from 2001-2002.Conclusions: The results suggest that adults with pain are a group increasingly vulnerable to adverse cannabis use outcomes, warranting clinical and public health attention to this risk. Psychiatrists and other health care providers treating patients with pain should monitor such patients for signs and symptoms of cannabis use disorder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Studies have found age-specific effects of medical cannabis laws (MCLs), particularly affecting adult cannabis use but not adolescent use. We examined whether age differences in MCL knowledge are in accordance with age differences in MCL effects on cannabis use.Methods: Data from the 2004-2013 repeated cross-sectional National Surveys on Drug Use and Health included people ages 12 and older in the United States. State-aggregated MCL knowledge was the proportion of people that correctly identified living in a state that did not allow medical cannabis prior to MCL enactment, or that allowed medical cannabis after MCL enactment. We regressed state-aggregated MCL knowledge on time-varying MCL enactment (i.e., no MCL by 2015, before MCL, after MCL), testing associations by age strata (12-17, 18-25, 26+), open dispensary status, and adjusting for time and state-level demographics.Results: Model-based MCL knowledge was significantly lower among adolescents than adults; after enactment, 36.8% of ages 12-17, 48.8% of ages 18-25, and 45.4% of ages 26+ were aware of their state's MCL status. Correct MCL status knowledge decreased across all age groups after MCL enactment (i.e., low knowledge of MCL changes at the time they occurred). Open cannabis dispensaries significantly increased correct MCL knowledge, with a 7.7-point increase for adolescents and a 17.5-point increase for adults 26 + .Conclusions: Lower MCL knowledge among adolescents than adults was in accordance with MCL effects on cannabis use previously observed among adults only. Studies should assess whether MCL knowledge is a consequence or predictor of individual-level cannabis use across age groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]