Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, United States.
Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, United States.
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2024 Apr 1;257:111113. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2024.111113. Epub 2024 Feb 2.
Cannabis use disorder (CUD) treatment prevalence decreased in the US between 2002 and 2019, yet structural mechanisms for this decrease are poorly understood. We tested associations between cannabis laws becoming effective and self-reported CUD treatment.
Restricted-use 2004-2019 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health included people ages 12+ classified as needing CUD treatment (i.e., past-year DSM-5-proxy CUD or last/current specialty treatment for cannabis). Time-varying indicators of medical cannabis laws (MCL) with/without cannabis dispensary provisions differentiated state-years before/after laws using effective dates. Multi-level logistic regressions with random state intercepts estimated individual- and state-adjusted CUD treatment odds by MCLs and model-based changes in specialty CUD treatment state-level prevalence. Secondary analyses tested associations between CUD treatment and MCL or recreational cannabis laws (RCL).
Using a broad treatment need sample definition in 2004-2014, specialty CUD treatment prevalence decreased by 1.35 (95 % CI = -2.51, -0.18) points after MCL without dispensaries and by 2.15 points (95 % CI = -3.29, -1.00) after MCL with dispensaries provisions became effective, compared to before MCL. Among people with CUD in 2004-2014, specialty treatment decreased only in MCL states with dispensary provisions (aPD = -0.91, 95 % CI = -1.68, -0.13). MCL were not associated with CUD treatment use in 2015-2019. RCL were associated with lower CUD treatment among people classified as needing CUD treatment, but not among people with past-year CUD.
Policy-related reductions in specialty CUD treatment were concentrated in states with cannabis dispensary provisions in 2004-2014, but not 2015-2019, and partly driven by reductions among people without past-year CUD. Other mechanisms (e.g., CUD symptom identification, criminal-legal referrals) could contribute to decreasing treatment trends.
2002 年至 2019 年期间,美国的大麻使用障碍(CUD)治疗率有所下降,但对于这种下降的结构机制知之甚少。我们测试了大麻相关法律生效与自我报告的 CUD 治疗之间的关联。
受限使用的 2004-2019 年全国毒品使用与健康调查包括年龄在 12 岁及以上的人群,这些人被归类为需要 CUD 治疗(即过去一年 DSM-5 代理 CUD 或最近/当前的大麻专科治疗)。具有/不具有大麻药房规定的医用大麻法律(MCL)的时变指标通过使用生效日期来区分法律生效前后的州年份。带有随机州截距的多层次逻辑回归估计了个体和州调整后的 CUD 治疗几率,方法是根据 MCL 和基于模型的专科 CUD 治疗州级患病率变化。二次分析测试了 CUD 治疗与 MCL 或娱乐性大麻法律(RCL)之间的关联。
在 2004-2014 年使用广泛的治疗需求样本定义时,在没有药房规定的 MCL 生效后,专科 CUD 治疗的流行率下降了 1.35 个点(95%CI=-2.51,-0.18),而在具有药房规定的 MCL 生效后下降了 2.15 个点(95%CI=-3.29,-1.00),与 MCL 之前相比。在 2004-2014 年患有 CUD 的人群中,只有在具有药房规定的 MCL 州,专科治疗才会减少(aPD=-0.91,95%CI=-1.68,-0.13)。在 2015-2019 年期间,MCL 与 CUD 治疗使用无关。RCL 与需要 CUD 治疗的人群中 CUD 治疗的使用呈负相关,但在过去一年有 CUD 的人群中则不然。
2004-2014 年,与政策相关的专科 CUD 治疗减少主要集中在具有大麻药房规定的州,而在 2015-2019 年则没有,而且部分原因是过去一年没有 CUD 的人群减少。其他机制(例如,CUD 症状识别,刑事法律转介)可能有助于减少治疗趋势。