Evaluations of State Medical Cannabis Programs in the USA: A Narrative Review.

Q1 Medicine Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids Pub Date : 2024-11-06 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1159/000542472
Lirit Franks, Gerald Cochran, Carter Reeves, Michael A Incze, Clinton J Hardy, Adam J Gordon, A Taylor Kelley
{"title":"Evaluations of State Medical Cannabis Programs in the USA: A Narrative Review.","authors":"Lirit Franks, Gerald Cochran, Carter Reeves, Michael A Incze, Clinton J Hardy, Adam J Gordon, A Taylor Kelley","doi":"10.1159/000542472","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medical cannabis (MC) use is increasing across the USA, with functional MC programs now operating in 38 states. While program policies and practices vary widely, little is known about whether and how states evaluate their programs. Better characterization of state MC program evaluation to date could inform states, program officials, and providers about best practices and provide a roadmap for future program evaluation.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>We conducted a narrative review of state MC program evaluations, including peer-reviewed literature and reports produced by independent state-based and non-state-based evaluators. Among 304 abstracts initially screened, seven evaluations met inclusion criteria. Within these evaluations, we report results according to three overarching themes: (1) evaluation characteristics, including comparison across evaluations; (2) program experience, including perceptions of providers and patients; and (3) assessment of cannabis use, including self-reported efficacy for qualifying medical conditions, patterns of medical and nonmedical cannabis use, and assessment of risk factors relevant to MC use. Additionally, we found that while goals and methods for state MC evaluations varied widely, evaluations that relied on independent, non-state entities tended to have more comprehensive and quantitatively rigorous results.</p><p><strong>Key messages: </strong>Few states operating MC programs have completed a formal evaluation of their program. Among states that have completed an evaluation, approaches varied widely; however, common themes were also present, which may inform future state evaluation efforts. Evaluation through independent, non-state partners may provide an optimal strategy to ensure high-quality data and meaningful results.</p>","PeriodicalId":18415,"journal":{"name":"Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids","volume":"7 1","pages":"243-256"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11620772/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000542472","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Medical cannabis (MC) use is increasing across the USA, with functional MC programs now operating in 38 states. While program policies and practices vary widely, little is known about whether and how states evaluate their programs. Better characterization of state MC program evaluation to date could inform states, program officials, and providers about best practices and provide a roadmap for future program evaluation.

Summary: We conducted a narrative review of state MC program evaluations, including peer-reviewed literature and reports produced by independent state-based and non-state-based evaluators. Among 304 abstracts initially screened, seven evaluations met inclusion criteria. Within these evaluations, we report results according to three overarching themes: (1) evaluation characteristics, including comparison across evaluations; (2) program experience, including perceptions of providers and patients; and (3) assessment of cannabis use, including self-reported efficacy for qualifying medical conditions, patterns of medical and nonmedical cannabis use, and assessment of risk factors relevant to MC use. Additionally, we found that while goals and methods for state MC evaluations varied widely, evaluations that relied on independent, non-state entities tended to have more comprehensive and quantitatively rigorous results.

Key messages: Few states operating MC programs have completed a formal evaluation of their program. Among states that have completed an evaluation, approaches varied widely; however, common themes were also present, which may inform future state evaluation efforts. Evaluation through independent, non-state partners may provide an optimal strategy to ensure high-quality data and meaningful results.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国国家医用大麻项目评估:叙述性回顾。
背景:医用大麻(MC)的使用在美国各地正在增加,功能性MC项目目前在38个州开展。虽然项目政策和实践差异很大,但人们对各州是否以及如何评估他们的项目知之甚少。迄今为止,更好地描述州MC项目评估可以让各州、项目官员和供应商了解最佳实践,并为未来的项目评估提供路线图。摘要:我们对各州MC项目评估进行了叙述性回顾,包括同行评议的文献和由独立的州级和非州级评估人员撰写的报告。在初步筛选的304篇摘要中,有7项评价符合纳入标准。在这些评估中,我们根据三个总体主题报告结果:(1)评估特征,包括评估之间的比较;(2)项目经验,包括对提供者和患者的看法;(3)评估大麻使用情况,包括自我报告对符合条件的医疗条件的效力、医用和非医用大麻使用模式,以及评估与大麻使用有关的风险因素。此外,我们发现,虽然国家MC评估的目标和方法差异很大,但依赖于独立的非国家实体的评估往往具有更全面和定量严谨的结果。关键信息:很少有实施MC项目的州完成了对其项目的正式评估。在已完成评估的国家中,方法差别很大;然而,也存在共同的主题,这可能会为未来的州评估工作提供信息。通过独立的、非国家的合作伙伴进行评估可以提供最佳策略,以确保高质量的数据和有意义的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids
Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids Medicine-Complementary and Alternative Medicine
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Use of Cannabis-Based Medical Products for Pediatric Health Conditions: A Systematic Review of the Recent Literature. Efficacy and Safety of Transdermal Medical Cannabis (THC:CBD:CBN formula) to Treat Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy of Lower Extremities. Evaluations of State Medical Cannabis Programs in the USA: A Narrative Review. Proceedings of the 2024 Cannabis Clinical Outcomes Research Conference. Development and in vitro Evaluation of Cannabidiol Mucoadhesive Buccal Film Formulations Using Hot-Melt Extrusion Technology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1