Exploring the association of legalisation status of cannabis with problematic cannabis use and impulsivity in the USA

Changes in cannabis use post decriminalisation in mental health care users in South Africa

Background

Personal cannabis use was decriminalised in South Africa in 2018. Cannabis use increases the risk of mental illness (MI) and worsens prognosis in patients with MI. The impact of decriminalisation on cannabis use remains unclear.

Aim

To examine cannabis use patterns by self-report and urine multidrug screening (UMDS) among psychiatric inpatients at Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital (CHBAH).

Setting

CHBAH, Soweto, South Africa.

Methods

A retrospective review of clinical records comparing patients admitted to CHBAH psychiatry pre- and post-decriminalisation.

Results

A total of 244 patients were included, with 57% using cannabis based on self-report and/or UMDS. Although not significant, overall cannabis use was higher post-decriminalisation (63.1%) than pre-decriminalisation (50.8%). Self-reported use increased slightly post-decriminalisation (56.6% vs. 50.0%), while UMDS-confirmed use was significantly higher (32.8% vs. 17.2%). Cannabis use was associated with male gender and younger age, with younger admissions post-decriminalisation.

Conclusion

Decriminalisation did not significantly increase overall or self-reported cannabis use; however, more patients tested positive on UMDS post-decriminalisation. Young males remain at higher risk of cannabis use.

Effects of Recreational Cannabis Legalization on Mental Health: Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

Recreational cannabis legalization (RCL) is expanding rapidly. RCL's effects on mental health issues are of particular concern because cannabis use is more frequent among people receiving psychiatric care and is associated with several psychiatric disorders. The authors conducted a scoping review to examine the evidence and discern gaps in the literature concerning the effects of RCL on mental health and to assess the factors responsible for an observed heterogeneity in research results.

METHODS

This scoping literature review followed PRISMA guidelines. Five databases-MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, APA PsycInfo, and Web of Science-were searched for English- or French-language reports published between January 1, 2012, and April 30, 2023.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies from the United States and Canada were found. The studies were classified by category of the study's data (patients receiving psychiatric care [k=1], death records [k=4], emergency department or hospital records [k=10], and the general population [k=13]) and by the diagnosis (schizophrenia or psychoses, mood disorders, anxiety disorders and symptoms, suicide or suicidal ideation, or other mental health issues) examined. The review findings revealed a paucity of research and indicated mixed and largely inconclusive results of the studies examined. Research gaps were found in the examination of potential changes in cannabis use patterns among people receiving psychiatric care and in the availability of longitudinal studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians, researchers, and policy makers need to collaborate to address the research gaps and to develop evidence-based policies that reflect a thorough understanding of the effects associated with RCL.

Health, safety, and socioeconomic impacts of cannabis liberalization laws: An evidence and gap map

Background

Globally, cannabis laws and regulations are rapidly changing. Countries are increasingly permitting access to cannabis under various decriminalization, medicalization, and legalization laws. With strong economic, public health, and social justice incentives driving these domestic cannabis policy reforms, liberalization trends are bound to continue. However, despite a large and growing body of interdisciplinary research addressing the policy-relevant health, safety, and socioeconomic consequences of cannabis liberalization, there is a lack of robust primary and systematic research that comprehensively investigates the consequences of these reforms.

Objectives

This evidence and gap map (EGM) summarizes the empirical evidence on cannabis liberalization policies. Primary objectives were to develop a conceptual framework linking cannabis liberalization policies to relevant outcomes, descriptively summarize the empirical evidence, and identify areas of evidence concentration and gaps.

Search Methods

We comprehensively searched for eligible English-language empirical studies published across 23 academic databases and 11 gray literature sources through August 2020. Additions to the pool of potentially eligible studies from supplemental sources were made through November 2020.

Selection Criteria

The conceptual framework for this EGM draws upon a legal epidemiological perspective highlighting the causal effects of law and policy on population-level outcomes. Eligible interventions include policies that create or expand access to a legal or decriminalized supply of cannabis: comprehensive medical cannabis laws (MCLs), limited medical cannabidiol laws (CBDLs), recreational cannabis laws (RCLs), industrial hemp laws (IHLs), and decriminalization of cultivations laws (DCLs). Eligible outcomes include intermediate responses (i.e., attitudes/behaviors and markets/environments) and longer-term consequences (health, safety, and socioeconomic outcomes) of these laws.

Data Collection and Analysis

Both dual screening and dual data extraction were performed with third person deconfliction. Primary studies were appraised using the Maryland Scientific Methods Scale and systematic reviews were assessed using AMSTAR 2.

Main Results

The EGM includes 447 studies, comprising 438 primary studies and nine systematic reviews. Most research derives from the United States, with little research from other countries. By far, most cannabis liberalization research focuses on the effects of MCLs and RCLs. Studies targeting other laws-including CBDLs, IHLs, and DCLs-are relatively rare. Of the 113 distinct outcomes we documented, cannabis use was the single most frequently investigated. More than half these outcomes were addressed by three or fewer studies, highlighting substantial evidence gaps in the literature. The systematic evidence base is relatively small, comprising just seven completed reviews on cannabis use (3), opioid-related harms (3), and alcohol-related outcomes (1). Moreover, we have limited confidence in the reviews, as five were appraised as minimal quality and two as low quality.

Authors’ Conclusions

More primary and systematic research is needed to better understand the effects of cannabis liberalization laws on longer-term-and arguably more salient-health, safety, and socioeconomic outcomes. Since most research concerns MCLs and RCLs, there is a critical need for research on the societal impacts of industrial hemp production, medical CBD products, and decriminalized cannabis cultivation. Future research should also prioritize understanding the heterogeneous effects of these laws given differences in specific provisions and implementation across jurisdictions.

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.

A Scoping Review of Risk and Protective Factors for Negative Cannabis Use Consequences

Objective

Numerous reviews have examined risk and protective factors for alcohol-related negative consequences, but no equivalent review of risk and protective factors exists for cannabis-related negative consequences (CRNCs)-a gap filled by the present study. This scoping review examined survey-based research of risk and protective factors for CRNCs such as neglecting responsibilities, blacking out, or needing more cannabis.

Methods

Three databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar) were searched for peer-reviewed manuscripts published between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 2021. A qualitative synthesis was performed using the matrix method and the results were organized using the socioecological model as a framework.

Results

Eighty-three studies were included in the review. There was considerable variation in measures and operationalizations of CRNCs across studies. Risk factors were identified in the intrapersonal (depression, social anxiety, PTSD, impulsivity, sensation seeking, motives, expectancies), interpersonal/community (trauma, victimization, family and peer substance use, social norms), and social/policy (education, employment, community attachment, legalization, availability of substances) domains of influence. Protective behavioral strategies were a robust protective factor for CRNCs. Males consistently reported more CRNCs than females, but there were no differences observed across race.

Conclusions

Future research should identify person- and product-specific patterns of CRNCs to refine theoretical models of cannabis misuse and addiction. Public health interventions to reduce the risk of negative consequences from cannabis should consider utilizing multilevel interventions to attenuate the cumulative risk from a combination of psychological, contextual, and social influences.

Endometriosis and Cannabis Consumption During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An International Cross-Sectional Survey

Introduction: Endometriosis affects 1 in 10 women worldwide, with most experiencing difficulties achieving adequate symptom control. These difficulties have been compounded by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic due to worldwide shifts in health care resource allocation. As cannabis is a relatively common form of self-management in endometriosis, this study aims to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cannabis consumption in those with endometriosis. Methods: An anonymous, cross-sectional online international survey was developed and promoted by endometriosis advocacy/support organizations worldwide. Respondents needed to have a diagnosis of endometriosis and be aged between 18 and 55. Results: A total of 1634 responses were received from 46 different countries. The average age of respondents was 30, with a mean diagnosis age of 25. Eight hundred forty-six respondents (51%) reported consuming cannabis in the past 3 months, with 55% of these reporting use for symptom management only. One in five respondents (20%) reported having consumed cannabis previously, the most common reason for discontinuation (65%) was access difficulties during COVID. Those who had legal access were more likely to consume cannabis than those without (p<0.0001) and were more likely to disclose usage to health care professionals (p<0.0001). The most common reasons for consuming cannabis during COVID was increased stress/anxiety (59%) and lack of access to normal medical care (48%). Pre-pandemic, cannabis was mostly consumed at least once a day (61%) and in inhaled forms (51.6%). Consumption increased for most people (57%) during the pandemic. During the pandemic just under a quarter (23%) of respondents changed their mode of consumption, with a reduction in inhaled forms (39.5%) and an increase in consumption of edibles (40%) or oil (25.2%). Conclusions: Cannabis consumption, especially for symptom relief, was relatively common among those with endometriosis, with some people starting their consumption of cannabis due to health care restrictions that occurred due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Difficulties accessing cannabis and unpleasant/unwanted side effects were the most common reasons for lack of current cannabis consumption in those who had previously consumed it. Cannabis consumption may form an important part of endometriosis management especially when access to routine medical care is restricted.

Remote detection of Cannabis-related impairments in performance?

RATIONALE

Researchers have traditionally studied the effects of psychoactive drugs such as Cannabis in controlled laboratory settings or relied on retrospective self-reports to measure impairment. However, advances in technology afford opportunities to conduct assessments remotely.

OBJECTIVES

We considered whether objective click-stream data (time and number of clicks spent on a webpage) during an online survey could supplement self-reports of substance use problems.

METHODS

The clickstream data of participants (n = 236) were examined as they completed an online study which included validated psychometric tests (Cannabis Use Disorders Identification Test-Revised, Grit-O, Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, and Brief Self Control Scale). Clickstream data were compared to self-reported Cannabis use.

RESULTS

People reporting Cannabis use within the last 4 weeks required more time and more clicks to complete the online survey, and this was specifically associated with reported frequency of use, duration of impairment, and problems with memory and concentration. Longer amounts of time and more clicks on the online questionnaire were associated with more recent Cannabis use rather than demographic factors or stimulant use.

CONCLUSIONS

These results imply clickstream data remotely detected indecision or other deficits associated with previous Cannabis use.

Canadian Society of Transplantation White Paper: Ethical and Legal Considerations for Alcohol and Cannabis Use in Solid Organ Listing and Allocation

Alcohol and cannabis use as a contraindication to organ transplantation is a controversial issue. Until recently, patients in Canada with alcohol-associated liver disease were required to demonstrate abstinence for 6 mo to receive a liver transplant. There is no equivalent rule that is applied consistently for cannabis use. There is some evidence that alcohol and cannabis use disorder pretransplant could be associated with worse outcomes posttransplantation. However, early liver transplantation for patients with alcohol-associated liver disease in France and in the United States has led to challenges of the 6-mo abstinence rule in Canada in the media. It has also resulted in several legal challenges arguing that the rule violates human rights laws regarding discrimination in the provision of medical services and that the rule is also unconstitutional (this challenge is still before the court). Recent legalization of cannabis use for adults in Canada has led to questions about the appropriateness of limiting transplant access based on cannabis use. The ethics committee of the Canadian Society of Transplantation was asked to provide an ethical analysis of cannabis and alcohol abstinence policies. Our conclusions were as follows: neither cannabis use nor the 6-mo abstinence rule for alcohol use should be an absolute contraindication to transplantation, and transplant could be offered to selected patients, further research should be conducted to ensure evidence-based policies; and the transplant community has a duty not to perpetuate stigma associated with alcohol and cannabis use disorders.

Cannabidiol and Neurodevelopmental Disorders in Children

Neurodevelopmental and neuropsychiatric disorders (such as autism spectrum disorder) have broad health implications for children, with no definitive cure for the vast majority of them. However, recently medicinal cannabis has been successfully trialled as a treatment to manage many of the patients' symptoms and improve quality of life. The cannabinoid cannabidiol, in particular, has been reported to be safe and well-tolerated with a plethora of anticonvulsant, anxiolytic and anti-inflammatory properties. Lately, the current consensus is that the endocannabinoid system is a crucial factor in neural development and health; research has found evidence that there are a multitude of signalling pathways involving neurotransmitters and the endocannabinoid system by which cannabinoids could potentially exert their therapeutic effects. A better understanding of the cannabinoids' mechanisms of action should lead to improved treatments for neurodevelopmental disorders.

Impacts de la légalisation du cannabis récréatif sur la santé mentale : une recension des écrits

Objectif Cet article présente une recension des écrits sur l’impact de la légalisation du cannabis récréatif sur la santé mentale et s’inscrit dans le contexte des politiques canadiennes récemment adoptées à cet égard.

Méthode Cette recension a été effectuée dans la base de données PubMed en utilisant la combinaison de termes associés au cannabis, à la légalisation et à la santé mentale. Deux évaluateurs indépendants ont ensuite examiné 272 titres et résumés, puis ont conservé 11 articles.

Résultats À la suite de la révision des articles, nous constatons que la plupart des études ciblant la consommation de cannabis décrivent une prévalence croissante d’utilisateurs. Il est à noter qu’aucune étude n’a démontré une diminution de la consommation du cannabis après la légalisation. Parmi les 11 articles retenus, trois évaluent la perception des risques associés au cannabis (avant et après la légalisation). Deux d’entre eux montrent une diminution des risques perçus après la légalisation, alors que le troisième décrit l’inverse. Quelques études ont également analysé l’impact de la légalisation du cannabis sur le nombre de visites à l’urgence générale et elles montrent toutes une augmentation du nombre de visites associées au cannabis. Cela dit, ces résultats sont simplement observationnels et sont à mettre en perspective avec les tendances qui prévalaient déjà avant la légalisation du cannabis.

Conclusion Cette recension des écrits montre qu’il existe un nombre limité d’études concernant l’impact de la légalisation du cannabis récréatif sur les troubles en santé mentale. Il serait donc intéressant de poursuivre les recherches sur ce sujet.

The Interplay between the Endocannabinoid System, Epilepsy and Cannabinoids

Epilepsy is a neurological disorder that affects approximately 50 million people worldwide. There is currently no definitive epilepsy cure. However, in recent years, medicinal cannabis has been successfully trialed as an effective treatment for managing epileptic symptoms, but whose mechanisms of action are largely unknown. Lately, there has been a focus on neuroinflammation as an important factor in the pathology of many epileptic disorders. In this literature review, we consider the links that have been identified between epilepsy, neuroinflammation, the endocannabinoid system (ECS), and how cannabinoids may be potent alternatives to more conventional pharmacological therapies. We review the research that demonstrates how the ECS can contribute to neuroinflammation, and could therefore be modulated by cannabinoids to potentially reduce the incidence and severity of seizures. In particular, the cannabinoid cannabidiol has been reported to have anti-convulsant and anti-inflammatory properties, and it shows promise for epilepsy treatment. There are a multitude of signaling pathways that involve endocannabinoids, eicosanoids, and associated receptors by which cannabinoids could potentially exert their therapeutic effects. Further research is needed to better characterize these pathways, and consequently improve the application and regulation of medicinal cannabis.

International Perspectives on the Implications of Cannabis Legalization: A Systematic Review & Thematic Analysis

The legality, recreational and medical use of cannabis varies widely by country and region but remains largely prohibited internationally. In October 2018, Canada legalized the recreational use of cannabis—a move many viewed as controversial. Proponents of legalization have emphasized the potential to eradicate the marijuana black market, improve quality and safety control, increase tax revenues, improve the availability of medical cannabis, and lower gang-related drug violence. Conversely, opponents of legalization have stressed concerns about cannabis’ addictive potential, second-hand cannabis exposure, potential exacerbation of underlying and established mental illnesses, as well as alterations in perception that affect safety, particularly driving. This systematic review synthesizes recent international literature on the clinical and public health implications of cannabis legalization.