Priorities for Medical Marijuana Research from the Perspective of Physicians, Dispensary Owners/Staff, and Patients: A Survey Study

Q1 Medicine Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids Pub Date : 2021-08-02 DOI:10.1159/000518105
J. Jean-Jacques, Robert Cook, A. Winterstein, A. Goodin, Joshua D. Brown, S. Jugl, Yan Wang
{"title":"Priorities for Medical Marijuana Research from the Perspective of Physicians, Dispensary Owners/Staff, and Patients: A Survey Study","authors":"J. Jean-Jacques, Robert Cook, A. Winterstein, A. Goodin, Joshua D. Brown, S. Jugl, Yan Wang","doi":"10.1159/000518105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: More patients are turning to medical marijuana as an alternative treatment, yet there are apparent knowledge gaps on the risk benefit of medical marijuana for a variety of indications. This study aimed to determine the priorities for medical marijuana research from the perspective of multiple stakeholders including patients, clinicians, and industry representatives. Methods: An anonymous survey was administered to attendees of the 2019 American Medical Marijuana Physicians Association annual meeting in Orlando, Florida. Respondents completed the survey on paper or smartphone via Qualtrics. The survey included questions on demographics and medical marijuana research priorities under the following broad categories: clinical conditions, safety issues, marijuana types, populations, and others. Results: Forty-six participants (56.5% female, mean age = 51.6 ± 14.1) responded to the survey. A majority were medical marijuana qualified physicians in Florida (56.5%), 30.5% other physicians or clinicians, and 21.7% medical marijuana patients (multiple choices allowed). The top conditions prioritized for research by this group were chronic pain, cancer, and anxiety, and the top priority safety issues were dosing/product choice, complications from smoking/vaping, and drug interactions. Regarding marijuana types, the group prioritized research on THC/CBD ratios, different modes of consumption, and terpenes. Conclusions: Findings from this survey indicate that medical marijuana stakeholders perceived a broad range of research topics as priorities. More research is needed to advance the evidence in these areas and provide guidance to patients, physicians, and the medical marijuana industry.","PeriodicalId":18415,"journal":{"name":"Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids","volume":"4 1","pages":"107 - 113"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000518105","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Objective: More patients are turning to medical marijuana as an alternative treatment, yet there are apparent knowledge gaps on the risk benefit of medical marijuana for a variety of indications. This study aimed to determine the priorities for medical marijuana research from the perspective of multiple stakeholders including patients, clinicians, and industry representatives. Methods: An anonymous survey was administered to attendees of the 2019 American Medical Marijuana Physicians Association annual meeting in Orlando, Florida. Respondents completed the survey on paper or smartphone via Qualtrics. The survey included questions on demographics and medical marijuana research priorities under the following broad categories: clinical conditions, safety issues, marijuana types, populations, and others. Results: Forty-six participants (56.5% female, mean age = 51.6 ± 14.1) responded to the survey. A majority were medical marijuana qualified physicians in Florida (56.5%), 30.5% other physicians or clinicians, and 21.7% medical marijuana patients (multiple choices allowed). The top conditions prioritized for research by this group were chronic pain, cancer, and anxiety, and the top priority safety issues were dosing/product choice, complications from smoking/vaping, and drug interactions. Regarding marijuana types, the group prioritized research on THC/CBD ratios, different modes of consumption, and terpenes. Conclusions: Findings from this survey indicate that medical marijuana stakeholders perceived a broad range of research topics as priorities. More research is needed to advance the evidence in these areas and provide guidance to patients, physicians, and the medical marijuana industry.
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
从医生、药房老板/工作人员和患者的角度看医用大麻研究的优先事项:一项调查研究
目的:越来越多的患者将医用大麻作为一种替代治疗方法,但对医用大麻在各种适应症中的风险效益存在明显的知识差距。本研究旨在从包括患者、临床医生和行业代表在内的多个利益相关者的角度确定医用大麻研究的优先级。方法:对在佛罗里达州奥兰多举行的2019年美国医用大麻医师协会年会上的与会者进行了一项匿名调查。受访者通过Qualtrics在纸上或智能手机上完成调查。该调查的问题包括人口统计学和医用大麻研究优先事项,分为以下大类:临床条件、安全问题、大麻类型、人口等。结果:共46人接受调查,其中女性56.5%,平均年龄51.6±14.1岁。大多数是佛罗里达州的医用大麻合格医生(56.5%),30.5%是其他医生或临床医生,21.7%是医用大麻患者(允许多选)。该组优先考虑的首要问题是慢性疼痛、癌症和焦虑,首要的安全问题是剂量/产品选择、吸烟/电子烟并发症和药物相互作用。在大麻类型方面,该小组优先研究了THC/CBD比例、不同的消费方式和萜烯。结论:本调查结果表明,医用大麻利益相关者将广泛的研究主题视为优先事项。需要更多的研究来推进这些领域的证据,并为患者、医生和医用大麻行业提供指导。
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
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. Cannabinoids for the Treatment of Glaucoma: A Review. Long-Term Treatment for Unspecified Anxiety Disorders with Cannabidiol: A Retrospective Case Series from Real-World Evidence in Colombia. Use of Cannabidiol-Dominant Extract as Co-Adjuvant Therapy for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Treatment in Feline: Case Report.
×
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