Drug and alcohol review · 2025
Clinicians' Perspectives on Cannabis Use and Cannabis Treatment in Clients Undertaking Opioid Dependence Treatment.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Parvaresh Laila, Mills Llewellyn, Gholami Jaleh, Jansen Louisa, Jamshidi Nazila, Baker Kate, Tremonti Christopher, Tracy Marguerite, Dunlop Adrian, Lintzeris Nicholas
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: There are no prior studies investigating the perspectives of Opioid Treatment Program (OTP) clinicians on clients' cannabis use. This study examines the perspectives of OTP clinicians on patterns of cannabis use; harms and benefits; current and potential interventions and their confidence in implementing them.
METHODS: Clinicians from six public OTP services in New South Wales completed the survey. Participants included nurses, doctors, pharmacists, allied health and consumer workers. Single-level regression models were used to estimate participants' sex, role and experience effect.
RESULTS: A total of 162 participants responded to the survey (estimated response rate 56%). Participants estimated 56.1% (±23.9) of OTP clients had used cannabis in the past month, and 44.9% (±6.5) had cannabis dependence. Clinicians indicated (15.3% ± 17.2%) clients identified problematic cannabis use and (10.7% ± 16.9) sought treatment in the past year. The harms most frequently identified by staff were cannabis dependence (46.5% ± 27.9%), financial issues (37.5% ± 29.2%) and increased tobacco use (33.1% ± 28.2%). The benefits most frequently identified were management of sleep problems (49.7% ± 27.8%), chronic pain symptoms (35.6% ± 24.3%) and improvements in mental health (48.3% ± 25.6%). Sixty-five participants (63.7%) advocated for enhancing efforts to address cannabis use, with none supporting scaling down services. Clinicians prioritised withdrawal services (81%), harm reduction (77.4%), counselling (74%) and medicinal cannabis (59.8%), although the majority had low confidence in delivering most of these interventions.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Despite awareness about cannabis use patterns and identification of both harms and benefits, clinicians identified low rates of cannabis interventions and low levels of confidence in delivering interventions.
METHODS: Clinicians from six public OTP services in New South Wales completed the survey. Participants included nurses, doctors, pharmacists, allied health and consumer workers. Single-level regression models were used to estimate participants' sex, role and experience effect.
RESULTS: A total of 162 participants responded to the survey (estimated response rate 56%). Participants estimated 56.1% (±23.9) of OTP clients had used cannabis in the past month, and 44.9% (±6.5) had cannabis dependence. Clinicians indicated (15.3% ± 17.2%) clients identified problematic cannabis use and (10.7% ± 16.9) sought treatment in the past year. The harms most frequently identified by staff were cannabis dependence (46.5% ± 27.9%), financial issues (37.5% ± 29.2%) and increased tobacco use (33.1% ± 28.2%). The benefits most frequently identified were management of sleep problems (49.7% ± 27.8%), chronic pain symptoms (35.6% ± 24.3%) and improvements in mental health (48.3% ± 25.6%). Sixty-five participants (63.7%) advocated for enhancing efforts to address cannabis use, with none supporting scaling down services. Clinicians prioritised withdrawal services (81%), harm reduction (77.4%), counselling (74%) and medicinal cannabis (59.8%), although the majority had low confidence in delivering most of these interventions.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Despite awareness about cannabis use patterns and identification of both harms and benefits, clinicians identified low rates of cannabis interventions and low levels of confidence in delivering interventions.