Jayawardhana Jayani, Fernandez Jose
Department of Health Management and Policy, College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA.
Department of Economics, College of Business, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, USA.
Health Serv Res. 2025 Jun;60(3):e14427. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.14427. Epub 2024 Dec 30.
To examine the impact of medical and recreational cannabis laws on inpatient visits for asthma and by payer-type.
Quasi-experimental difference-in-differences regression analysis was conducted while accounting for variations in cannabis laws implementation timing by states. Inpatient visits for asthma in states with a given type of cannabis law were compared with those in states that did not implement the specific law. Four different cannabis laws were examined in the study-initial passage of medical cannabis law, opening of a medical cannabis dispensary, home cultivation of medical cannabis, and recreational cannabis legalization.
State-level quarterly inpatient visit data for asthma patients were utilized from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Fast Stats database. The primary analysis included inpatient visits for asthma by all payer adult patients aged 19 and above in 38 states from 2005 to 2017, and the secondary analysis included inpatient visits for asthma by payer-type (i.e., private, Medicare, Medicaid, uninsured).
States with medical cannabis dispensaries and legalized recreational cannabis experienced 14.12% (2.14; 95% CI, 0.74-3.53; p < 0.01) and 20.45% (3.08; 95% CI, 1.47-4.69; p < 0.001) increases in inpatient visits for asthma compared with states without these policies, respectively. These increases in inpatient visits for asthma were primarily driven by populations covered by Medicare and private insurance, with Medicare population showing larger effects of both recreational cannabis laws and medical cannabis dispensaries.
States with medical cannabis dispensaries and legalized recreational cannabis experienced higher rate of inpatient visits for asthma compared with states without these policies. Clinicians and policymakers should consider strategies to curb adverse health outcomes of cannabis, that is likely to result in increased costs of healthcare.
研究医用大麻和娱乐用大麻法律对哮喘住院就诊率以及按付款方类型划分的住院就诊率的影响。
采用准实验性差异分析回归方法,同时考虑各州大麻法律实施时间的差异。将实施特定类型大麻法律的州的哮喘住院就诊情况与未实施该法律的州进行比较。本研究考察了四种不同的大麻法律——医用大麻法律的首次通过、医用大麻药房开业、医用大麻家庭种植以及娱乐用大麻合法化。
利用医疗成本与利用项目快速统计数据库中的州级季度哮喘患者住院就诊数据。主要分析包括2005年至2017年38个州19岁及以上所有付款方成年患者的哮喘住院就诊情况,次要分析包括按付款方类型(即私人保险、医疗保险、医疗补助计划、无保险)划分的哮喘住院就诊情况。
与没有这些政策的州相比,设有医用大麻药房以及娱乐用大麻合法化的州哮喘住院就诊率分别增加了14.12%(2.14;95%置信区间,0.74 - 3.53;p < 0.01)和20.45%(3.08;95%置信区间,1.47 - 4.69;p < 0.001)。哮喘住院就诊率的这些增加主要由医疗保险和私人保险覆盖人群推动,医疗保险人群受娱乐用大麻法律和医用大麻药房的影响更大。
与没有这些政策的州相比,设有医用大麻药房以及娱乐用大麻合法化的州哮喘住院就诊率更高。临床医生和政策制定者应考虑采取策略来遏制大麻可能导致的不良健康后果,因为这可能会导致医疗保健成本增加。