64号提案通过后,加州的药用和综合药用/娱乐大麻使用。

IF 4.3 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Daniel Ageze, Renee Dell'Acqua, Thomas D Marcotte, Jill Rybar, Sara Baird, Alice Gold, Tom Shaughnessy, Ilene Lanin-Kettering, Linda Hill
{"title":"64号提案通过后,加州的药用和综合药用/娱乐大麻使用。","authors":"Daniel Ageze, Renee Dell'Acqua, Thomas D Marcotte, Jill Rybar, Sara Baird, Alice Gold, Tom Shaughnessy, Ilene Lanin-Kettering, Linda Hill","doi":"10.1186/s42238-025-00285-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Proposition 64, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act of 2016, reshaped cannabis use in California. This study explores the use patterns of people who use cannabis for medicinal-only and combined medicinal and recreational use after implementation of Proposition 64.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A quantitative, population-based online questionnaire included 4,020 current cannabis users, 523 former users, and 635 non-users. This analysis focuses on participants who self-identified as using cannabis for medicinal-only (n = 711) or both medicinal and recreational (M + R, n = 1719) purposes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty one percent of current cannabis users report medicinal use. Medicinal-only users were more likely to be female (OR 1.6, p < 0.001), have kids in household (OR 1.5, p < 0.001), and began cannabis use later (mean age 34 vs. 23, p < 0.001). Pain relief was the predominant reason for use, followed by sleep, anxiety, and stress relief. While both groups reported positive effects, M + R users experienced more negative side effects. Fewer medicinal-only users cited a desire to \"feel the high,\" (42% vs. 75% M + R, p < 0.001). Medicinal-only users felt less comfortable discussing cannabis with primary care providers than M + R users (75% vs 83%, p < 0.01). All users were more likely to seek information online (44-57%) or from friends/family (47-52%) than health professionals (26-27%). Dispensaries were the main cannabis source for both medicinal groups (72% M vs. 84% M + R, p < 0.01), with licensure being very or extremely important (72% M, 66% M + R, p < 0.01). Monthly spending for medicinal-only users was lower ($127 vs. $186 for M + R, p < 0.001), and they were more likely than M + R users to wait before feeling safe to drive after using cannabis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>People who use medicinal cannabis alone vary in key areas from people who use cannabis for both medicinal and recreational reasons. The need for better patient-provider relationships and clinically informed guidance is evident to support medicinal cannabis users.</p>","PeriodicalId":101310,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cannabis research","volume":"7 1","pages":"44"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12255994/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medicinal and combined medicinal/recreational cannabis use in California following the passage of Proposition 64.\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Ageze, Renee Dell'Acqua, Thomas D Marcotte, Jill Rybar, Sara Baird, Alice Gold, Tom Shaughnessy, Ilene Lanin-Kettering, Linda Hill\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s42238-025-00285-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Proposition 64, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act of 2016, reshaped cannabis use in California. This study explores the use patterns of people who use cannabis for medicinal-only and combined medicinal and recreational use after implementation of Proposition 64.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A quantitative, population-based online questionnaire included 4,020 current cannabis users, 523 former users, and 635 non-users. This analysis focuses on participants who self-identified as using cannabis for medicinal-only (n = 711) or both medicinal and recreational (M + R, n = 1719) purposes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty one percent of current cannabis users report medicinal use. Medicinal-only users were more likely to be female (OR 1.6, p < 0.001), have kids in household (OR 1.5, p < 0.001), and began cannabis use later (mean age 34 vs. 23, p < 0.001). Pain relief was the predominant reason for use, followed by sleep, anxiety, and stress relief. While both groups reported positive effects, M + R users experienced more negative side effects. Fewer medicinal-only users cited a desire to \\\"feel the high,\\\" (42% vs. 75% M + R, p < 0.001). Medicinal-only users felt less comfortable discussing cannabis with primary care providers than M + R users (75% vs 83%, p < 0.01). All users were more likely to seek information online (44-57%) or from friends/family (47-52%) than health professionals (26-27%). Dispensaries were the main cannabis source for both medicinal groups (72% M vs. 84% M + R, p < 0.01), with licensure being very or extremely important (72% M, 66% M + R, p < 0.01). Monthly spending for medicinal-only users was lower ($127 vs. $186 for M + R, p < 0.001), and they were more likely than M + R users to wait before feeling safe to drive after using cannabis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>People who use medicinal cannabis alone vary in key areas from people who use cannabis for both medicinal and recreational reasons. The need for better patient-provider relationships and clinically informed guidance is evident to support medicinal cannabis users.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101310,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of cannabis research\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12255994/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of cannabis research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42238-025-00285-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cannabis research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42238-025-00285-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:第64号提案,即2016年的《成人大麻使用法案》,重塑了加州的大麻使用。本研究探讨了64号提案实施后,仅将大麻用于药用和药用与娱乐结合使用的人的使用模式。方法:一份定量的、基于人群的在线问卷调查包括4020名目前的大麻使用者、523名曾经的使用者和635名非使用者。本分析侧重于自我认定仅为药用(n = 711)或药用和娱乐(M + R, n = 1719)目的使用大麻的参与者。结果:目前61%的大麻使用者报告了药用用途。结论:单独使用医用大麻的人在关键领域与同时使用医用和娱乐用途大麻的人有所不同。为支持医用大麻使用者,显然需要改善患者与提供者的关系和临床知情指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Medicinal and combined medicinal/recreational cannabis use in California following the passage of Proposition 64.

Background: Proposition 64, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act of 2016, reshaped cannabis use in California. This study explores the use patterns of people who use cannabis for medicinal-only and combined medicinal and recreational use after implementation of Proposition 64.

Methods: A quantitative, population-based online questionnaire included 4,020 current cannabis users, 523 former users, and 635 non-users. This analysis focuses on participants who self-identified as using cannabis for medicinal-only (n = 711) or both medicinal and recreational (M + R, n = 1719) purposes.

Results: Sixty one percent of current cannabis users report medicinal use. Medicinal-only users were more likely to be female (OR 1.6, p < 0.001), have kids in household (OR 1.5, p < 0.001), and began cannabis use later (mean age 34 vs. 23, p < 0.001). Pain relief was the predominant reason for use, followed by sleep, anxiety, and stress relief. While both groups reported positive effects, M + R users experienced more negative side effects. Fewer medicinal-only users cited a desire to "feel the high," (42% vs. 75% M + R, p < 0.001). Medicinal-only users felt less comfortable discussing cannabis with primary care providers than M + R users (75% vs 83%, p < 0.01). All users were more likely to seek information online (44-57%) or from friends/family (47-52%) than health professionals (26-27%). Dispensaries were the main cannabis source for both medicinal groups (72% M vs. 84% M + R, p < 0.01), with licensure being very or extremely important (72% M, 66% M + R, p < 0.01). Monthly spending for medicinal-only users was lower ($127 vs. $186 for M + R, p < 0.001), and they were more likely than M + R users to wait before feeling safe to drive after using cannabis.

Conclusion: People who use medicinal cannabis alone vary in key areas from people who use cannabis for both medicinal and recreational reasons. The need for better patient-provider relationships and clinically informed guidance is evident to support medicinal cannabis users.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信