Wellbridge Center for Addiction Treatment and Research.
Brown School of Social Work, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Washington University in St. Louis, 4560 Clayton Avenue, Suite 1000, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
J Subst Abuse Treat. 2021 Dec;131:108535. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2021.108535. Epub 2021 Jun 11.
Research has explored the impact of various medical cannabis policies on substance use treatment admission in recent years, but we know little about factors related to participants' treatment engagement and outcome. To fill this gap in the existing literature, this study used national data to examine the influence of cannabis policies (decriminalized, medical, and recreational) and referral sources (criminal justice vs. voluntary) on treatment completion and length of stay.
Data came from the Treatment Episode Data Set-Discharge (2006-2017) on adults 18+ whose primary drug at treatment admission was cannabis. Difference-in-difference analyses using logistic regression examined the effect of cannabis policies on outpatient treatment completion (yes/no; n = 2,192,807) and length of stay (more/fewer than 90 days; n = 1,863,585) in those with a criminal justice or voluntary referral source.
Cannabis policy was not associated with treatment completion in either those with a criminal justice or voluntary referral source. Compared to individuals in states where cannabis use was strictly illegal, those in states with a decriminalization policy were less likely to stay in treatment for 91+ days regardless of the referral source.
Cannabis policy appears to have a differential effect on treatment completion versus length of stay, with policy having no impact on successful treatment completion. Specifically, we found that decriminalization policies hinder treatment engagement past 90 days. In this sense, length of stay may be a more useful measure of treatment outcome for research than treatment completion moving forward. Furthermore, our study found that neither medical nor recreational policies affected length of stay or treatment completion, regardless of referral source.
近年来,研究已经探讨了各种医用大麻政策对物质使用治疗入院的影响,但我们对与参与者治疗参与和结果相关的因素知之甚少。为了填补现有文献中的这一空白,本研究使用国家数据研究了大麻政策(合法化、医用和娱乐用)和转介来源(刑事司法与自愿)对治疗完成率和住院时间的影响。
数据来自于 2006 年至 2017 年接受治疗的 18 岁及以上成年人的治疗阶段数据设置-出院(Treatment Episode Data Set-Discharge),他们在治疗入院时的主要药物是大麻。使用逻辑回归的差异分析检验了大麻政策对具有刑事司法或自愿转介来源的门诊治疗完成(是/否;n=2192807)和住院时间(90 天以上/以下;n=1863585)的影响。
对于具有刑事司法或自愿转介来源的个体,大麻政策与治疗完成均无关联。与大麻使用严格非法的州相比,无论转介来源如何,在大麻合法化政策的州,与住院 91 天以上相关的个体接受治疗的可能性更小。
大麻政策似乎对治疗完成率与住院时间有着不同的影响,政策对成功的治疗完成率没有影响。具体来说,我们发现合法化政策阻碍了 90 天以上的治疗参与。在这种意义上,与治疗完成相比,住院时间可能是未来研究中更有用的治疗结果衡量标准。此外,无论转介来源如何,我们的研究发现医用或娱乐用政策均未影响住院时间或治疗完成率。