A difference-in-difference approach to examining the impact of cannabis legalization on disparities in the use of cigarettes and cannabis in the United States, 2004-17

Evolving Disparities in Cannabis Use Among Youth by Demographics and Tobacco and Alcohol Use in the U.S.: 2013-2021

INTRODUCTION

This study investigated the prevalence of past 30-day cannabis use among U.S. youth by cigarette use, alcohol use, demographics, and state-of-residence cannabis legal status in 2021 and examined whether changes in cannabis use prevalence were modified by these factors from 2013 to 2021.

METHODS

Data were drawn from the 24 states that collected cannabis use data participating in the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System from 2013 to 2021. Logistic regression analyses estimated past 30-day cannabis prevalence in 2021 and produced AORs by current cigarette, alcohol, and state-of-residence cannabis legal status. The same method was used with year as the exposure, adjusting for sex, race, and ethnicity, to assess trends in prevalence from 2013 to 2021.

RESULTS

In 2021, cannabis use was more common among female youth (16.75% vs 13.83% [AOR=1.26, 95% CI=1.16, 1.37]) and non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic youth than among non-Hispanic White youth (17.19%, 16.14% vs 14.60% [AOR=1.25, 95% CI=1.12, 1.39 and AOR=1.16, 95% CI=1.04, 1.29, respectively]). Cannabis use was much more common among youth who reported any past 30-day cigarette or alcohol use (44.90% vs 6.48% [AOR=11.80, 95% CI=10.57, 13.18]). Declines in cannabis use were observed independent of state-level cannabis law from 2013 to 2021, and cannabis use prevalence did not differ significantly by state-of-residence cannabis legal status among the 24 participating states in 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

Public health officials should carefully consider the potential impact of expanding commercialization of cannabis as a wellness product on youth cannabis use, especially with regard to minoritized populations and co-use with tobacco and alcohol. National and state-level public health education on cannabis use and youth-oriented prevention of cannabis uptake are long overdue.

State cannabis laws and cannabis positivity among fatally injured drivers

BACKGROUND

As of November 8, 2023, 24 states and the District of Columbia have legalized cannabis for both recreational and medical use (RMCL-states), 14 states have legalized cannabis for medical use only (MCL-states) and 12 states have no comprehensive cannabis legislation (NoCL-states). As more states legalize cannabis for recreational use, it is critical to understand the impact of such policies on driving safety.

METHODS

Using the 2019 and 2020 Fatality Analysis Reporting System data, we performed multivariable logistic regression modeling to explore the association between state level legalization status and cannabis positivity using toxicological testing data for 14,079 fatally injured drivers. We performed a sensitivity analysis by including multiply imputed toxicological testing data for the 14,876 eligible drivers with missing toxicological testing data.

RESULTS

Overall, 4702 (33.4%) of the 14,079 fatally injured drivers tested positive for cannabis use. The prevalence of cannabis positivity was 30.7% in NoCL-states, 32.8% in MCL-states, and 38.2% in RMCL-states (p < 0.001). Compared to drivers fatally injured in NoCL-states, the adjusted odds ratios of testing positive for cannabis were 1.09 (95% confidence interval: 0.99, 1.19) for those fatally injured in MCL-states and 1.54 (95% confidence interval: 1.34, 1.77) for those fatally injured in RMCL-states. Sensitivity analysis yielded similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Over one-third of fatally injured drivers tested positive for cannabis use. Drivers fatally injured in states with laws permitting recreational use of cannabis were significantly more likely to test positive for cannabis use than those in states without such laws. State medical cannabis laws had little impact on the odds of cannabis positivity among fatally injured drivers.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Medical and Recreational Cannabis Legalization and Cannabis Use Among Youth in the United States

OBJECTIVE

Dramatic changes in state-level cannabis laws (CL) over the past 25 years have shifted societal beliefs throughout the United States, with unknown implications for youth. In the present study, we conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis examining estimated effects of medical cannabis legalization (MCL) and recreational cannabis legalization (RCL) on past-month cannabis use among US youth.

METHOD

A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, followed by a subsequent meta-analysis investigating the associations between state-level cannabis laws (ie, MCL vs non-MCL, and RCL vs non-RCL) and past-month cannabis use prevalence among US adolescents and young adults. Supplemental analyses examined age-group effects and design-related factors.

RESULTS

Our search identified 4,604 citations, 34 and 30 of which were included in qualitative and quantitative analyses, respectively. Meta-analysis of MCL studies identified no significant association between MCL and change in past-month youth cannabis use (odds ratio [OR] = 0.981, 95% CI = 0.960, 1.003). Meta-analysis of RCL studies showed significantly increased odds of past-month cannabis use (OR = 1.134, 95% CI = 1.116-1.153). Meta-analysis of more recent studies, however, showed a significantly increased odds of past-month cannabis use among both adolescents and young adults (OR = 1.089, 95% CI = 1.015,1.169, and OR = 1.221, 95% CI = 1.188,1.255, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Cannabis legalization has complex and heterogenous effects on youth use that may differ across law types. Our meta-analytic results showed modest positive effects of RCL on past-month cannabis use (more so in young adults than in adolescents) and minimal effects of MCL on these outcomes in US youth. Given the shift toward recreational legalization, additional focus on RCL effects is warranted.

Is legalization of recreational cannabis associated with levels of use and cannabis use disorder among youth in the United States? A rapid systematic review

Cannabis legalization policies are rapidly changing in the United States. While there are concerns that recreational legalization will negatively affect young people, previous reviews have not provided clear indication of such effects. The purpose of this rapid systematic review was to examine whether recreational legalization was associated with increases in prevalence of cannabis use and use disorder among adolescents and young adults. PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Dissertations & Theses Global, the Trip Database, and OpenGrey were searched from date of inception through Marcy 17, 2022 to retrieve all relevant records. English language and human subject filters were applied. Two reviewers screened abstracts and titles, assessed full text articles, and coded the final included articles. Studies including primarily 10- to 19-year-olds were classified as adolescent, and those between 18 and 26 years as young adult. Our search identified 33 research reports (22 with adolescent samples; 14 young adult). For adolescents, ten studies reported no change in use prevalence associated with legalization, six reported a decrease, and seven reported an increase. Among young adults, most studies (8) showed an increase in at least one prevalence measure, four showed no change, and one showed a decrease. Only two adolescent and one young adult study examined cannabis use disorder, both adolescent studies showed an increase, and the young adult showed no change. The majority of studies had risk of bias. Recreational legalization may be associated with increases in prevalence of cannabis use in young adults while results for adolescents are mixed. Policymakers and practitioners should consider appropriate prevention and treatment options for young people.Trial Registration: PROSPERO #CRD42021276984.

Tobacco, Alcohol, and Drug Use Among Young Adults with Serious Mental Illness

To inform early intervention, this study describes correlates of substance use among young people with serious mental illness (SMI) enrolled in integrated care in community mental health settings. 227 adults ages 18-35 were assessed for clinical characteristics and substance use. Logistic regressions were used to describe relationships between substance use and participant characteristics. Over a third (38.9%) reported daily cannabis, 15.9% past month other illicit drug, 13.5% frequent/heavy alcohol and 47.4% any of these; 50.2% reported daily tobacco smoking and 23.3% current vaping. Daily cannabis and tobacco were the most common combination. Alcohol, drug, and cannabis with tobacco were associated with higher mental health symptoms but not with emergency room or hospital utilization. Cannabis and other substance use was common and associated with higher symptoms but not with greater hospital utilization, suggesting that early intervention could prevent long-term negative consequences.

Cannabis Use Among Adults in Cigarette Smoking Cessation Treatment in Ontario, Canada: Prevalence and Association With Tobacco Cessation Outcome, 2015-2021

Objectives. To examine cannabis use prevalence and its association with tobacco cessation among adults enrolled in cigarette smoking cessation treatment before and after Canada legalized recreational cannabis in October 2018. Methods. The sample comprised 83 206 adults enrolled in primary care-based cigarette smoking cessation treatment between 2015 and 2021 in Ontario, Canada. Past-30-day cannabis use was self-reported at enrollment and cigarette smoking abstinence at 6-month follow-up. Results. Past-30-day prevalence of cannabis use increased from 20.2% in 2015 to 37.7% in 2021. The prevalence increased linearly both before and after legalization. Cannabis and tobacco co-use was associated with lower odds of self-reported cigarette smoking abstinence at 6-month follow-up than tobacco use only (24.4% vs 29.3%; odds ratio [OR] = 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.75, 0.81). This association was attenuated after adjustment for covariates (OR = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.89, 0.97) and weakened slightly over time. Conclusions. Cannabis use prevalence almost doubled from 2015 to 2021 among primary care patients in Ontario seeking treatment to quit cigarettes and was associated with poorer quit outcomes. Further research into the impact of cannabis policy on cannabis and tobacco co-use is warranted to mitigate harm. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(1):98-107. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307445).

Association of Cannabis Legalization with Cannabis Positive Drug Screening in US Veterans

Background

Although cannabis legalization is associated with increases in self-report cannabis use, biological measures of cannabis use are needed to address potential bias introduced by improved self-reporting of cannabis use in states enacting medical cannabis laws (MCL) and recreational cannabis laws (RCL).

Objective

Quantify the role of MCL and RCL enactment in cannabis positive urine drug screen (UDS) prevalence among Veterans Health Administration (VHA) emergency department (ED) patients from 2008 to 2019.

Design

Staggered-adoption difference-in-difference analysis were used to estimate the role of MCL and RCL in cannabis positive UDS data, fitting adjusted linear binomial regression models to estimate the association between MCL and RCL enactment and prevalence of cannabis positive UDS.

Participants

VHA enrolled veterans aged 18-75 years with ≥1 ED visit in a given year from 2008 to 2019.

Main Measures

Receipt of ≥1 cannabis positive UDS during an ED visit were analyzed.

Key Results

From 2008 to 2019, adjusted cannabis positive UDS prevalences increased from 16.4% to 25.6% in states with no cannabis law, 16.6% to 27.6% in MCL-only enacting states, and 18.2% to 33.8% in RCL-enacting states. MCL-only and MCL/RCL enactment was associated with a 0.8% (95% CI, 0.4-1.0) and 2.9% (95% CI, 2.5-3.3) absolute increase in cannabis positive UDS, respectively. Significant effect sizes were found for MCL and RCL, such that 7.0% and 18.5% of the total increase in cannabis positive UDS prevalence in MCL-only and RCL states could be attributed to MCLs and RCLs.

Conclusions

In this study of VHA ED patients, MCL and RCL enactment played a significant role in the overall increases in cannabis positive UDS. The increase in a biological measure of cannabis use reduces concerns that previously documented increases in self-reported cannabis use from surveys are due to changes in patient willingness to report use as it becomes more legal.

Pain is associated with exclusive use and co-use of tobacco and cannabis: Findings from Wave 5 (2018-2019) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study

INTRODUCTION

Rates of tobacco and cannabis use are disproportionately high among individuals with pain, and evidence suggests that pain may engender greater likelihood of substance co-use, yielding additive risk. This study examined national associations of pain with past-month tobacco use, cannabis use, and co-use of tobacco and cannabis.

METHODS

Data came from a nationally representative US sample of adults in Wave 5 (2018-2019) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study (N = 32,014). The sample included civilian, non-institutionalized people who use tobacco and people who do not use tobacco. Past-week pain intensity (0-10) was dichotomized (0-4 no/low pain; 5-10 moderate/severe pain). Multinomial models adjusted for demographics examined substance use category membership (no tobacco or cannabis use, exclusive cannabis use, exclusive tobacco use, co-use) as a function of pain status.

RESULTS

Moderate/severe pain was associated with increased relative risk of exclusive tobacco use (RRR [CI] 2.26 [2.05, 2.49], p <.001), exclusive cannabis use (1.49 [1.22, 1.82], p <.001), and co-use of tobacco and cannabis (2.79 [2.51, 3.10], p <.001), in comparison to no tobacco or cannabis use. Additionally, moderate/severe pain was associated with increased risk of co-use compared to exclusive tobacco use (1.23 [1.11, 1.37], p <.001) and exclusive cannabis use (1.88 [1.54, 2.29], p <.001).

DISCUSSION

Findings suggest that not only is pain independently associated with greater risk of exclusively using tobacco or cannabis, but pain is also associated with heightened risk of co-using both products. Future work should examine the dynamic and potentially bidirectional relationships between pain and use of cannabis and tobacco.

Chronic Pain, Cannabis Legalization and Cannabis Use Disorder in Veterans Health Administration Patients, 2005 to 2019

Background

The risk for cannabis use disorder (CUD) is elevated among U.S. adults with chronic pain, and CUD rates are disproportionately increasing in this group. Little is known about the role of medical cannabis laws (MCL) and recreational cannabis laws (RCL) in these increases. Among U.S. Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients, we examined whether MCL and RCL effects on CUD prevalence differed between patients with and without chronic pain.

Methods

Patients with ≥1 primary care, emergency, or mental health visit to the VHA and no hospice/palliative care within a given calendar year, 2005-2019 (yearly n=3,234,382 to 4,579,994) were analyzed using VHA electronic health record (EHR) data. To estimate the role of MCL and RCL enactment in the increases in prevalence of diagnosed CUD and whether this differed between patients with and without chronic pain, staggered-adoption difference-in-difference analyses were used, fitting a linear binomial regression model with fixed effects for state, categorical year, time-varying cannabis law status, state-level sociodemographic covariates, a chronic pain indicator, and patient covariates (age group [18-34, 35-64; 65-75], sex, and race and ethnicity). Pain was categorized using an American Pain Society taxonomy of painful medical conditions.

Outcomes

In patients with chronic pain, enacting MCL led to a 0·14% (95% CI=0·12%-0·15%) absolute increase in CUD prevalence, with 8·4% of the total increase in CUD prevalence in MCL-enacting states attributable to MCL. Enacting RCL led to a 0·19% (95%CI: 0·16%, 0·22%) absolute increase in CUD prevalence, with 11·5% of the total increase in CUD prevalence in RCL-enacting states attributable to RCL. In patients without chronic pain, enacting MCL and RCL led to smaller absolute increases in CUD prevalence (MCL: 0·037% [95%CI: 0·03, 0·05]; RCL: 0·042% [95%CI: 0·02, 0·06]), with 5·7% and 6·0% of the increases in CUD prevalence attributable to MCL and RCL. Overall, MCL and RCL effects were significantly greater in patients with than without chronic pain. By age, MCL and RCL effects were negligible in patients age 18-34 with and without pain. In patients age 35-64 with and without pain, MCL and RCL effects were significant (p<0.001) but small. In patients age 65-75 with pain, absolute increases were 0·10% in MCL-only states and 0·22% in MCL/RCL states, with 9·3% of the increase in CUD prevalence in MCL-only states attributable to MCL, and 19.4% of the increase in RCL states attributable to RCL. In patients age 35-64 and 65-75, MCL and RCL effects were significantly greater in patients with pain.

Interpretation

In patients age 35-75, the role of MCL and RCL in the increasing prevalence of CUD was greater in patients with chronic pain than in those without chronic pain, with particularly pronounced effects in patients with chronic pain age 65-75. Although the VHA offers extensive behavioral and non-opioid pharmaceutical treatments for pain, cannabis may seem a more appealing option given media enthusiasm about cannabis, cannabis commercialization activities, and widespread public beliefs about cannabis efficacy. Cannabis does not have the risk/mortality profile of opioids, but CUD is a clinical condition with considerable impairment and comorbidity. Because cannabis legalization in the U.S. is likely to further increase, increasing CUD prevalence among patients with chronic pain following state legalization is a public health concern. The risk of chronic pain increases as individuals age, and the average age of VHA patients and the U.S. general population is increasing. Therefore, clinical monitoring of cannabis use and discussion of the risk of CUD among patients with chronic pain is warranted, especially among older patients.

Research in Context

Evidence before this study: Only three studies have examined the role of state medical cannabis laws (MCL) and/or recreational cannabis laws (RCL) in the increasing prevalence of cannabis use disorder (CUD) in U.S. adults, finding significant MCL and RCL effects but with modest effect sizes. Effects of MCL and RCL may vary across important subgroups of the population, including individuals with chronic pain. PubMed was searched by DH for publications on U.S. time trends in cannabis legalization, cannabis use disorders (CUD) and pain from database inception until March 15, 2023, without language restrictions. The following search terms were used: (medical cannabis laws) AND (pain) AND (cannabis use disorder); (recreational cannabis laws) AND (pain) AND (cannabis use disorder); (cannabis laws) AND (pain) AND (cannabis use disorder). Only one study was found that had CUD as an outcome, and this study used cross-sectional data from a single year, which cannot be used to determine trends over time. Therefore, evidence has been lacking on whether the role of state medical and recreational cannabis legalization in the increasing US adult prevalence of CUD differed by chronic pain status.Added value of this study: To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine whether the effects of state MCL and RCL on the nationally increasing U.S. rates of adult cannabis use disorder differ by whether individuals experience chronic pain or not. Using electronic medical record data from patients in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) that included extensive information on medical conditions associated with chronic pain, the study showed that the effects of MCL and RCL on the prevalence of CUD were stronger among individuals with chronic pain age 35-64 and 65-75, an effect that was particularly pronounced in older patients ages 65-75.Implications of all the available evidence: MCL and RCL are likely to influence the prevalence of CUD through commercialization that increases availability and portrays cannabis use as 'normal' and safe, thereby decreasing perception of cannabis risk. In patients with pain, the overall U.S. decline in prescribed opioids may also have contributed to MCL and RCL effects, leading to substitution of cannabis use that expanded the pool of individuals vulnerable to CUD. The VHA offers extensive non-opioid pain programs. However, positive media reports on cannabis, positive online "information" that can sometimes be misleading, and increasing popular beliefs that cannabis is a useful prevention and treatment agent may make cannabis seem preferable to the evidence-based treatments that the VHA offers, and also as an easily accessible option among those not connected to a healthcare system, who may face more barriers than VHA patients in accessing non-opioid pain management. When developing cannabis legislation, unintended consequences should be considered, including increased risk of CUD in large vulnerable subgroups of the population.

Assessing the Impact of Recreational Cannabis Legalization on Cannabis Use Disorder and Admissions to Treatment in the United States

Purpose of Review

Policy implications from changes in recreational cannabis laws (RCLs) have raised public health concerns. While numerous studies have examined the impact of RCLs on cannabis use, there is less research on the risk of developing cannabis use disorder (CUD). This review summarizes the latest research on the effects of RCLs on CUD prevalence and cannabis treatment admissions.

Recent Findings

Nine studies were published between 2016 - 2022 that examined RCLs and CUD or treatment. Findings generally indicate an increase in CUD prevalence associated with legalization, but effects differ by age group. There was no significant association between legalization and CUD treatment admissions, and CUD admissions decreased overall during the study periods.

Summary

To improve policy, prevention, and treatment services, policymakers should monitor RCLs' effects on adverse public health outcomes and researchers should consider the effects on individual and community-level characteristics. We discuss methodological challenges in conducting state-level research and provide suggestions for future studies.

Co-Use, Simultaneous Use, and Mixing of Cannabis and Tobacco: A Cross-National Comparison of Canada and the US by Cannabis Administration Type

INTRODUCTION

Increasing cannabis legalization raises concerns that the use of tobacco, frequently used with cannabis, will also increase. This study investigated the association between the legal status of cannabis in places of residence and the prevalence of cannabis and tobacco co-use, simultaneous use, and mixing by comparing the prevalence among adults in Canada (prior to cannabis legalization) vs. adults in US states that had legalized recreational cannabis vs. US states that had not as of September 2018.

METHODS

Data were drawn from the 2018 International Cannabis Policy Study, conducted with respondents aged 16-65 in Canada and the US recruited from nonprobability consumer panels. Differences in the prevalence of co-use, simultaneous use, and mixing between tobacco and different cannabis products were examined using logistic regression models by legal status of place of residence among past-12-month cannabis consumers (N = 6744).

RESULTS

Co-use and simultaneous use in the past 12 months were most common among respondents in US legal states. Among cannabis consumers, co-use and simultaneous use were less common in US legal states, while mixing was less frequent in US states with both legal and illegal cannabis compared to Canada. Use of edibles was associated with lower odds of all three outcomes, while smoking dried herb or hash was associated with higher odds.

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of cannabis consumers who used tobacco was lower in legal jurisdictions despite higher prevalence of cannabis use. Edible use was inversely associated with co-use, suggesting that edible use does not appear to be associated with increased tobacco use.

Behavioral economic relationship between cannabis and cigarettes: Evidence from hypothetical purchase tasks

BACKGROUND

In the United States (U.S), cannabis policies have been increasingly liberalized whereas tobacco policies have been increasingly stringent. Given the high prevalence of cannabis and tobacco dual use, there are concerns that a policy regulating one substance may unintendedly influence the other. This study examined the responsiveness of the demand for cannabis joints and cigarettes when price varied.

METHODS

The study included 338 adult participants (21+) who used both cannabis and tobacco and lived in one of the U.S. states with recreational cannabis legalized by the time of interview in 2019. They completed hypothetical purchase tasks to indicate the quantity desired of cannabis joints and cigarette packs 1) when only one substance was available with escalating prices and 2) when both substances were concurrently available with escalating prices of cannabis joints and a fixed price of cigarette packs. We estimated 1) the own-price elasticity of demand for each substance using nonlinear exponential demand model, and 2) the cross-price elasticity of demand at aggregate level using nonlinear exponential demand model and at individual level using log-linear demand model.

RESULTS

The estimates for the rate of change of own-price elasticity (α) were 0.0011 (SE = 0.000039, p < 0.001) for cannabis joints and 0.00095 (SE = 0.000037, p < 0.001) for cigarette packs. The aggregate-level estimates of cross-price elasticity (I = 13.032, SE = 0.34, p < 0.001; β = 0.0029, SE = 0.0021, p > 0.05) suggest an independent relationship between the two substances. At individual level, 78.70% of the participants treated the two substances as independent, 17.46% as complements, and 3.85% as substitutes.

CONCLUSIONS

For most adults who used both cannabis and tobacco in the U.S., cannabis joints and cigarettes had an independent relationship. Policies regulating the price of cannabis may not have large unintended consequences on cigarette use.

Determining the impact of cannabis use and severity on tobacco cessation outcomes: study protocol for a prospective tobacco treatment trial

BACKGROUND

Several evidence-based tobacco cessation treatment strategies exist, though significant barriers to cessation remain which must be addressed to improve abstinence rates for sub-populations of those smoking cigarettes. Cannabis co-use among those who use tobacco is common and appears to be increasing among adults in the United States (US). The literature evaluating the impact of cannabis use on tobacco cessation has been mixed and has several important limitations, which precludes development of treatment recommendations specific to individuals who use tobacco and co-use cannabis. To date, no prospective studies have evaluated the impact of cannabis use and severity on tobacco cessation or quantified cannabis use changes during tobacco treatment to assess for concurrent reductions, abstinence, or compensatory (i.e., increased) cannabis use. This study's aims are to: (1) evaluate tobacco cessation outcomes among participants who co-use cannabis compared to participants only using tobacco, (2) using daily diaries and biochemical verification, assess changes in cannabis use during tobacco treatment, and (3) assess for a dose-dependent impact of cannabis use on tobacco cessation.

METHOD

A multi-site, prospective, quasi-experimental 12-week tobacco treatment trial enrolling treatment-seeking adults (ages 18-40; N = 208) from three sites across South Carolina (US) who use tobacco daily and oversampling (2:1) those who co-use cannabis. Participants receive tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy (varenicline) paired with behavioral support, while cannabis use is not addressed as part of treatment. The primary outcome is 7-day point prevalence tobacco abstinence at the week 12 end of treatment visit, measured via biochemical verification and self-report. Secondary outcome measures include changes in cannabis use (via biochemical verification and self-report) during tobacco cessation treatment.

DISCUSSION

Results from this trial have the potential to inform tobacco treatment among those co-using cannabis, which may require a tailored approach to address the role of cannabis in quitting tobacco.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04228965. January 14th, 2020.

The clouded debate: A systematic review of comparative longitudinal studies examining the impact of recreational cannabis legalization on key public health outcomes

Background

Ineffective cannabis regulatory frameworks such as prohibition have sparked interest in alternative solutions to reduce individual and societal harms. While it has been suggested that the recreational legalization process has yielded early successes, the relatively recent implementation of the novel policies has provided a modest time frame for a truly thorough establishment and assessment of key population-level indicators. The following systematic review focuses on identifying the downstream public health sequelae of cannabis legalization policies, including parameters such as cannabis consumption rates, hospitalization rates, vehicular accidents and fatalities, criminal activity, and suicidal behaviors, as well as other substance use trends.

Methods

An exhaustive search of the MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases were performed to identify high-quality (1) longitudinal studies, which (2) compared key public health outcomes between regions which had and had not implemented recreational cannabis legalization (RML) policies, (3) using distinct databases and/or time frames. Thirty-two original research articles were retained for review.

Results

Adult past-month cannabis consumption (26+ years) seems to have significantly increased following RML, whereas young adult (18-26 years) and adolescent (12-17 years) populations do not show a significant rise in past-month cannabis use. RML shows preliminary trends in increasing service use (such as hospitalizations, emergency department visits, or poisonings) or vehicular traffic fatalities. Preliminary evidence suggests that RML is related to potential increases in serious/violent crimes, and heterogeneous effects on suicidal behaviors. While the research does not illustrate that RML is linked to changing consumptions patterns of cigarette, stimulant, or opioid use, alcohol use may be on the rise, and opioid prescribing patterns are shown to be significantly correlated with RML.

Conclusion

The current data supports the notion that RML is correlated with altered cannabis consumption in adults, potentially increased criminal activity, and a decline in opioid quantities and prescriptions provided to patients. Future work should address additional knowledge gaps for vulnerable populations, such as individuals with mental health problems or persons consuming cannabis frequently/at higher THC doses. The effects of varying legalization models should also be evaluated for their potentially differing impacts on population-level outcomes.

Estimating the effects of legalizing recreational cannabis on newly incident cannabis use

Liberalized state-level recreational cannabis policies in the United States (US) fostered important policy evaluations with a focus on epidemiological parameters such as proportions [e.g., active cannabis use prevalence; cannabis use disorder (CUD) prevalence]. This cannabis policy evaluation project adds novel evidence on a neglected parameter–namely, estimated occurrence of newly incident cannabis use for underage (<21 years) versus older adults. The project’s study populations were specified to yield nationally representative estimates for all 51 major US jurisdictions, with probability sample totals of 819,543 non-institutionalized US civilian residents between 2008 and 2019. Standardized items to measure cannabis onsets are from audio computer-assisted self-interviews. Policy effect estimates are from event study difference-in-difference (DiD) models that allow for causal inference when policy implementation is staggered. The evidence indicates no policy-associated changes in the occurrence of newly incident cannabis onsets for underage persons, but an increased occurrence of newly onset cannabis use among older adults (i.e., >21 years). We offer a tentative conclusion of public health importance: Legalized cannabis retail sales might be followed by the increased occurrence of cannabis onsets for older adults, but not for underage persons who cannot buy cannabis products in a retail outlet. Cannabis policy research does not yet qualify as a mature science. We argue that modeling newly incident cannabis use might be more informative than the modeling of prevalences when evaluating policy effects and provide evidence of the advantages of the event study model over regression methods that seek to adjust for confounding factors.