Frequent cannabis users demonstrate low knowledge of cannabinoid content and dosages

Patients' knowledge about the uses, risks, and beliefs surrounding the regulation and safety of Cannabis sativa L. in Peru

In recent decades, there has been a significant rise in the utilization of medical cannabis. Understanding the various facets surrounding its usage and regulation is paramount for patients, health professionals, and policymakers. This cross-sectional study conducted at the CANNAVITAL clinic in Lima, Peru aimed to assess the basic knowledge, attitudes towards use, and beliefs regarding regulation and safety of Cannabis sativa L. Among 86 patients (mean age: 41 ± 7.8 years; 53.4% women) actively receiving medical cannabis treatment for at least one year, we utilized the 22-item KUC-22 questionnaire to evaluate their understanding of cannabis, risk factors, legislation, medical and recreational use. The average duration of medical cannabis use was 3 ± 1.2 years. Results showed that 60.2% of patients were familiar with different forms of cannabis consumption, while 77.3% recognized the importance of product quality. Chronic pain, nausea and vomiting (each 23.9%) were the primary conditions treated with cannabis, followed by cancer and epilepsy (both 21.6%). A significant correlation was found between knowledge and cannabis use (p < 0.001). Furthermore, 92% of patients believed that a medical prescription was necessary, while 84.1% engaged in self-medication practices. Concerning perceptions, 69.3% of participants perceived psychological dependence from long-term cannabis use, and 65.9% believed it could cause health damage. Significant correlations were observed between the perception of risk factors, knowledge of legislation, and cannabis use (p < 0.001). In conclusion, Peruvian patients exhibited a high level of knowledge regarding the risks, uses, and regulatory framework surrounding Cannabis sativa L. These findings provide valuable insights into patients' perspectives on medical cannabis, offering important information for medical providers and researchers aiming to enhance cannabinoid-based therapies.

Typical Hits, Grams, or Joints: Evaluating Cannabis Survey Measurement Strategies for Quantifying Consumption

Aim: Standardized survey measures that capture diverse cannabis consumption patterns are needed to inform public health and policy. Our team is developing a flexible, personalized, low-burden survey item inventory to measure cannabis use patterns and estimate milligrams of THC (mgTHC) consumption in large samples. This study aimed to identify measurement gaps and analysis implications associated with an initial pool of candidate items that assessed use of cannabis flower and concentrate products (smoked and/or vaporized). Methods: Adult cannabis consumers (n=4247) completed an online survey assessing cannabis use frequency, quantity, product types, product potencies (%THC), and methods of administration. Participants chose to report their consumption quantities using one of three units: "hits per day," "grams per week," or "joints per week." Respondents also indicated whether their past 7-day consumption pattern represented their typical pattern. Results: Eighty-one percent had used cannabis daily in the past week. Thirty-two percent, 53%, and 15% chose to report flower and concentrate consumption quantity in hits, grams, and joints, respectively. Approximately 80-90% of responses for the number of hits, grams, and joints consumed were less than the maximum response option-suggesting that response options captured the full range of potential cannabis consumption behaviors. Those who chose grams or joints units were generally more likely to endorse higher risk cannabis use (e.g., morning use, high %THC products) in the past week than those who chose the hits unit (adjusted Odds Ratio range: 1.2-3.9). Among those who reported that the past week represented their typical behavior (83%), past 30-day and past 7-day frequencies were highly correlated (Spearman's Rho=0.77)-supporting the feasibility of using lower burden "typical week" items to extrapolate patterns beyond a 1-week time frame. Conclusion: Results from this online convenience sample of frequent cannabis consumers suggest that the current items yield coherent and expected response patterns. Although additional testing is required, a standardized, flexible survey instrument for large-scale assessment of cannabis patterns and calculation of mgTHC seems within reach.

Self-reported knowledge of tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol concentration in cannabis products among cancer patients and survivors

PURPOSE

Cannabis use may introduce risks and/or benefits among people living with cancer, depending on product type, composition, and nature of its use. Patient knowledge of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) or cannabidiol (CBD) concentration could provide information for providers about cannabis use during and after treatment that may aide in risk and benefit assessments. This study aimed to examine knowledge of THC or CBD concentration among patients living with cancer who consume cannabis, and factors associated with knowledge of cannabinoid concentrations.

METHODS

People living with cancer who consumed cannabis since their diagnosis (n = 343) completed an anonymous, mixed-mode survey. Questions assessed usual mode of delivery (MOD), knowledge of THC/CBD concentration, and how source of acquisition, current cannabis use, and source of instruction are associated with knowledge of THC/CBD concentration. Chi-square and separate binary logistic regression analyses were examined and weighted to reflect the Roswell Park patient population.

RESULTS

Less than 20% of people living with cancer had knowledge of THC and CBD concentration for the cannabis products they consumed across all MOD (smoking- combustible products, vaping- vaporized products (e-cigarettes), edibles-eating or drinking it, and oral- taking by mouth (pills)). Source of acquisition (smoking-AOR:4.6, p < 0.01, vaping-AOR:5.8, p < 0.00, edibles-AOR:2.6, p < 0.04), current cannabis use (edibles-AOR:5.4, p < 0.01, vaping-AOR: 11.2, p < 0.00, and oral-AOR:9.3, p < 0.00), and source of instruction (vaping only AOR:4.2, p < 0.05) were found to be variables associated with higher knowledge of THC concentration.

CONCLUSION

Self-reported knowledge of THC and CBD concentration statistically differed according to MOD, source of acquisition, source of instruction, and current cannabis use.

Knowledge of Cannabinoid Content Among People Living with HIV Who Use Cannabis: a Daily Diary Study

BACKGROUND

Many people living with HIV (PLWH) use cannabis for medicinal reasons. Patients' knowledge of the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) concentrations of the cannabis products they use may be important in helping patients achieve symptom relief while guarding against potential risks of cannabis use. However, no studies have examined cannabinoid concentration knowledge among PLWH.

METHOD

PLWH (N = 29; 76% men, mean age 47 years) reporting cannabis use for both medicinal and nonmedicinal reasons completed daily surveys over 14 days assessing cannabis products used, knowledge of cannabinoid concentrations of cannabis products used, cannabis use motives (medicinal, nonmedicinal, both), and positive and negative cannabis-related consequences. Across the 361 cannabis use days captured on the daily surveys, at least some knowledge of cannabinoid concentrations was reported on an average of 43.1% (for THC) and 26.6% (for CBD) of the days.

RESULTS

Generalized linear mixed models revealed that participants were more likely to report knowing THC and CBD concentrations on days when they used non-flower forms of cannabis relative to days when they used cannabis flower only. Participants who used cannabis for medicinal reasons on a greater proportion of days had greater knowledge of cannabinoid concentration overall across days. Further, greater overall knowledge of cannabinoid concentrations was associated with fewer reported negative cannabis-related consequences.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that among PLWH, knowledge of cannabinoid concentrations may be higher when using non-flower cannabis products and among those reporting primarily medicinal cannabis use. Moreover, knowledge of cannabinoid concentration may protect against negative cannabis-related consequences in this population.

An Assessment of Psychedelic Knowledge Among People Using Psychedelics Naturalistically

Identifying gaps and strengths in psychedelic-related knowledge is key to developing effective, evidence-based education to inform appropriate use of and harm reduction practices for psychedelics in the naturalistic use landscape. The current study piloted an assessment instrument with questions on legal status, therapeutic potential, and side effects of psychedelics among people reporting current psychedelic use. We recruited participants (N = 1435) at a psychedelic advocacy event and through psychedelic interest groups on social media. Respondents completed a brief survey of psychedelic use and psychedelic knowledge. Items assessed basic knowledge of various topics surrounding psychedelics, such as legal status, active compounds, and known therapeutic efficacy based on the clinical trial literature. Respondents who had used greater numbers of different psychedelics, with higher levels of education, lower age, greater frequency of psychedelic use, identifying as male, used high doses (vs. microdosing only), identifying as Caucasian/White, and with greater annual household income answered more questions correctly. Most respondents exhibited high knowledge of psychedelics, though there is also a demonstrated need for education and outreach, especially in under-represented communities.

Physicians' Attitudes and Practices Regarding Cannabis and Recommending Medical Cannabis Use

Introduction: Medical cannabis users tend not to trust or rely on health care providers regarding cannabis advice. Previous surveys of physicians have focused on favorability toward medical cannabis. The current study assesses how physicians interact with patients regarding cannabis in their day-to-day practice, and whether and how they address important topics such as use patterns and substituting cannabis for medications. We predicted that physicians would generally perceive cannabis dispensary staff and caretakers as not competent in addressing patient health needs and would not be likely to use their recommendations. Methods: Physicians in a university-affiliated health system completed an anonymous online survey. The survey assessed physicians' cannabis related education experiences, perceptions of their knowledge of and competence regarding medical cannabis, and the content of cannabis related discussions with patients. We also examined perceptions of the sources of influence on patients regarding cannabis and physicians' attitudes toward medical cannabis dispensary staff and medical cannabis caregivers (MCCs). Results: A few physicians (10%) had ever signed a medical cannabis authorization form for their patients, consistent with their perceptions of low knowledge and competence in this area. Discussions on cannabis primarily focus on risks (63%) rather than dosage (6%) and harm reduction (25%). Physicians see their influence on patients as weak compared with other information sources and have generally unfavorable attitudes toward medical cannabis dispensary staff and MCCs. Conclusion: Greater integration of medical cannabis knowledge is needed at all levels of medical and clinical education to address the potential harm to patients if they receive no guidance. Continued research is needed to provide a strong scientific basis for developing treatment guidelines and standardized medical education for medical cannabis use.

Consumer Experiences with Delta-8-THC: Medical Use, Pharmaceutical Substitution, and Comparisons with Delta-9-THC

Introduction: Cannabis products containing delta-8-THC became widely available in most of the United States in late 2020 and rapidly became a significant source of revenue for hemp processing companies, especially in states where use of delta-9-THC remains illegal or requires professional authorization for medical use. Scientific research on the use of delta-8-THC is scarce, previous clinical studies included a combined total of 14 participants, leading some state governments to prohibit it until its properties and effects are better understood. Methods: Researchers developed an online survey for delta-8-THC consumers addressing a broad range of issues regarding delta-8-THC, including use for the treatment of health and medical conditions. Previous survey studies on the medical use of cannabis and cannabis products informed survey components. Results: Patterns of delta-8-THC use had both similarities with and differences from the use of delta-9-THC cannabis and products. Administration methods were primarily edibles (64%) and vaping concentrates (48%). About half of the participants (51%) used delta-8-THC to treat a range of health and medical conditions, primarily anxiety or panic attacks (69%), stress (52%), depression or bipolar disorder (46%), and chronic pain (41%). Participants compared delta-8-THC very favorably with both delta-9-THC and pharmaceutical drugs and reported substantial levels of substitution for both. Most participants did not inform their primary care provider of their delta-8-THC use (78%) and were not confident of their primary care provider's ability to integrate medical cannabis into their treatment (70%). Knowledge of effective dosages was low, and participants' knowledge of delta-8-THC was primarily from the Internet and their own experiences. Conclusion: Harm reduction is a central component of public health. Although the legal environment is becoming more restrictive for delta-8-THC in comparison to delta-9-THC, results suggest that delta-8-THC may be equally effective for desired purposes of cannabis use and lower in undesirable or adverse effects. All policies and practices should be informed by empirical evidence. Considerable research will be needed to systematically verify the patterns reported by participants, and collaborations among academic researchers, government, and the cannabis industry may be valuable in developing the knowledge base for delta-8-THC and other cannabinoids.

Assessing Health Care Providers' Knowledge of Medical Cannabis

Introduction: Many health care providers would benefit from greater knowledge and awareness of medical cannabis, even if they choose not to integrate it into their medical practice. Unfortunately, health care providers generally report low knowledge of medical cannabis and cite this lack of knowledge as a barrier to making patient recommendations. It is important to understand health care providers' medical cannabis knowledge and its correlates. However, few studies have rigorously assessed clinically relevant cannabis-related knowledge, instead typically focusing on attitudes toward cannabis and perceived knowledge. Methods: Physicians in a university-affiliated health system completed an anonymous online survey. The survey assessed participants' basic demographics and medical experience, experiences with cannabis education, beliefs about their knowledge of and competency regarding medical cannabis, and knowledge of medical cannabis in relation to the current scientific evidence. Results: The average level of medical cannabis knowledge was 58% correct, with scores ranging from 39% to 78% correct. Perceived cannabis knowledge predicted actual knowledge, and those who pursued self-initiated study or attended a lecture on medical cannabis had higher knowledge levels. Conclusion: Levels of factual knowledge about medical cannabis among physicians were moderate. Our results highlight the mismatch between physician knowledge and cannabis policy. We offer our brief, 10-min assessment as a baseline for characterizing cannabis knowledge, acknowledging that the content and interpretation may change as knowledge advances.

Understanding Lower-Risk Cannabis Consumption from the Consumers' Perspective: A Rapid Evidence Assessment

Background: In the current rapid evidence assessment, we summarize the existing research on lower-risk cannabis consumption as understood by those who consume cannabis. Methods: We identified 7111 unique articles published between 1900 and 2021 using search terms related to a) cannabis consumption, b) beliefs and behaviors, and c) positive outcomes. Results: Twelve articles met our inclusion criteria. Three themes emerged that reflect lower-risk cannabis beliefs and behaviors (informed self-regulation, protective behavioral strategies, and the normalization of cannabis consumption) and one theme reflected motivations that undermine lower-risk cannabis consumption (e.g., using cannabis to cope). Conclusions: Results suggest a need for targeted lower-risk cannabis consumption research-research focused on how those who consume cannabis do so in a positive, non-problematic manner. Such research would help to inform policy and practice and, ultimately, help promote lower-risk cannabis consumption strategies.

Description of collaborative, fee-for-service, office-based, pharmacist-directed medical cannabis therapy management service for patients with chronic pain

BACKGROUND

Treatment with medical cannabis (MC) in the United States tends to be patient-driven in nature despite evidence that suggests that patients have remarkably poor knowledge on the medical use of this treatment modality.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and pilot a collaborative, fee-for-service (FFS), office-based, pharmacist-directed MC therapy management (MCTM) service for patients suffering chronic pain.

PRACTICE DESCRIPTION

A collaborative, FFS, office-based, pharmacist-directed MCTM service where patients are seen after a physician deems them suitable for treatment with MC. The pharmacist designs the initial treatment regimen by selecting a formulation, dose, route, and frequency of administration and then manages ongoing therapy by making regimen changes based on the patient's response, adverse effects, and financial concerns.

PRACTICE INNOVATION

The creation of a specialized service where a registered MC pharmacist is positioned in a collaborating provider's office and sees patients face-to-face for the provision of MCTM services.

EVALUATION METHODS

Patient retention, revenue generated, and ability to replicate the service were evaluated. Patient satisfaction was assessed by collecting subjective feedback on the service.

RESULTS

The pilot site that developed the service has seen 133 patients from 2016 to 2021 and has retained 89% of patients after 5 years of quarterly appointments. Patients appear willing to pay out of pocket for the service, and the revenue generated covers the pharmacist's and collaborating physician's time as well as additional overhead. The service has been replicated at 2 additional sites, and patient feedback has been positive.

CONCLUSIONS

MCTM is another useful pharmacist service that patients are willing to pay for. MCTM services decrease the collaborating provider's workload while still allowing them to offer their patients personalized treatment with MC. In our experience, the service retains patients, generates enough revenue to cover costs, can be replicated, and is well received by patients.

Human Laboratory Models of Cannabis Use: Applications for Clinical and Translational Psychiatry Research

Cannabis is increasingly used by individuals with mental health diagnoses and often purported to treat anxiety and various other psychiatric symptoms. Yet support for using cannabis as a psychiatric treatment is currently limited by a lack of evidence from rigorous placebo-controlled studies. While regulatory hurdles and other barriers make clinical trials of cannabis challenging to conduct, addiction researchers have decades of experience studying cannabis use in human laboratory models. These include methods to control cannabis administration, to delineate clinical and mechanistic aspects of cannabis use, and to evaluate potential treatment applications for cannabis and its constituents. In this paper, we review these human laboratory procedures and describe how each can be applied to study cannabis use in patients with psychiatric disorders. Because anxiety disorders are among the most common psychiatric illnesses affecting American adults, and anxiety relief is also the most commonly-reported reason for medicinal cannabis use, we focus particularly on applying human laboratory models to study cannabis effects in individuals with anxiety and related disorders. Finally, we discuss how these methods can be integrated to study cannabis effects in other psychiatric conditions and guide future research in this area.

Use and Perceptions of Cannabidiol Products in Canada and in the United States

Objectives: This study aimed to characterize use and perceptions of cannabidiol (CBD) products. Materials and Methods: Participants aged 16-65 years in Canada (n=15,042) and the United States (n=30,288) completed measures on prevalence and patterns of CBD product use and perceptions of CBD oil as part of the 2019 International Cannabis Policy Study online survey. Results: Past 12-month CBD product use was significantly more prevalent among respondents in the United States (26.1%) than in Canada (16.2%). Consumers in the United States and Canada reported using a range of CBD products, including drops (46.3% vs. 47.3%, respectively), topicals (26.0% vs. 16.7%), edibles/foods (23.8% vs. 17.6%), vape oils (18.9% vs. 13.3%), capsules (13.3% vs. 16.7%), and dried flower (10.1% vs. 16.1%). CBD was most commonly reported for management of pain, anxiety, and depression. Over half of CBD consumers in both countries reported that CBD oil was beneficial for health. Conclusions: Use of CBD products is common in both the United States and Canada, primarily to manage self-reported health conditions for which there is little or no evidence of efficacy. Clearer public health messaging regarding the therapeutic effects of CBD is warranted.

Knowledge of Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol Levels Among Cannabis Consumers in the United States and Canada

Objective: This study aimed to examine consumer knowledge of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) levels for usual cannabis products. Methods: Data are from the International Cannabis Policy Study conducted online in August-September 2018. Respondents included 6471 past 12-month cannabis users, aged 16-65 years, recruited from the Nielsen Global Insights Consumer Panel using nonprobability methods. Respondents were recruited from Canada, which had not yet legalized nonmedical cannabis (n=2354), and US states that had (n=2160) and had not (n=1957) legalized nonmedical cannabis. Results: Participants reported descriptive THC:CBD ratios (e.g., high THC, low CBD) and numeric THC and CBD levels (mg or %) for products they usually use in each of nine product categories. Few consumers knew and were able to report the numeric THC or CBD levels of their usual cannabis products. For example, only 10% of dried herb consumers reported the THC level, approximately 30% of whom reported implausible values. A greater proportion of consumers reported a descriptive THC:CBD ratio of their usual product, ranging from 50.9% of edible users to 78.2% of orally ingested oil users. Consumers were substantially more likely to report products high in THC versus low in THC for all products except topicals and tinctures, whereas similar proportions reported using products high and low in CBD. Despite some evidence of greater knowledge in legal jurisdictions, knowledge was still low in states with legal cannabis markets. Conclusions: Consumer knowledge of THC and CBD levels was low, with only modest differences between consumers living in jurisdictions that had and had not legalized nonmedical cannabis. The findings cast doubt on the validity of self-reported cannabinoid levels.

A content analysis of internet information sources on medical cannabis

BACKGROUND

Medical cannabis users report that their knowledge regarding cannabis is predominantly from their own personal experiences and the Internet.

OBJECTIVE

We summarize and describe information found through Internet searches on medical cannabis in English language websites.

METHODS

We used terms related to medical cannabis in the Google search engine between November and December 2019. Resulting websites were catalogued and coded for content, including mentions of health and medical conditions, pharmacology, dosage, harmful or adverse effects, harm reduction techniques, cautions or warnings, products for sale, and credentials.

RESULTS

We coded 344 web pages on 179 unique websites. Cannabis was mentioned for the treatment of 151 different medical and health conditions, only four of the twenty most frequently mentioned conditions have received substantial empirical support for cannabis or cannabinoid treatment. Information content varied widely across sites, only a small proportion of sites included information on pharmacology, dosage, risks, and other aspects that are requirements for pharmaceutical drugs. Information provided was only moderately related to conclusions in the emerging scientific literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the rise in cannabis use within the U.S. and the reliance on the Internet as a source of information, considerable efforts are needed to provide accurate on-line cannabis education to minimize harms and maximize benefits for individuals and society.