Jessica L Bourdon1, Meredith W Francis2, Lena Jia3, Chenxue Liang4, Helen I Robinson5, Richard A Grucza6. 1. Wellbridge Center for Addiction Treatment and Research. Electronic address: jbourdon@wellbridge.org. 2. 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. Electronic address: meredith.francis@wustl.edu. 3. Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S Euclid Avenue, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA. Electronic address: lenajia@wustl.edu. 4. Department of Psychiatry, Washington University in St. Louis, 4560 Clayton Avenue, Suite 1000, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA; Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar St, New Haven, CT 06510. Electronic address: chenxue.liang@yale.edu. 5. Brown School of Social Work, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA. Electronic address: helenrobinson@wustl.edu. 6. Department of Psychiatry, St. Louis University, 660 S Euclid Avenue, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA. Electronic address: richard.grucza@health.slu.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.
BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.
Authors: Joseph G Pickard; Paul Sacco; Carissa van den Berk-Clark; Elián P Cabrera-Nguyen Journal: Aging Ment Health Date: 2018-12-27 Impact factor: 3.658
Authors: Esther K Choo; Madeline Benz; Nikolas Zaller; Otis Warren; Kristin L Rising; K John McConnell Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2014-04-16 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Wilson M Compton; Beth Han; Christopher M Jones; Carlos Blanco; Arthur Hughes Journal: Lancet Psychiatry Date: 2016-08-31 Impact factor: 27.083
Authors: Tom P Freeman; Peggy van der Pol; Wil Kuijpers; Jeroen Wisselink; Ravi K Das; Sander Rigter; Margriet van Laar; Paul Griffiths; Wendy Swift; Raymond Niesink; Michael T Lynskey Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2018-01-31 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: Donna M Coviello; Dave A Zanis; Susan A Wesnoski; Nicole Palman; Arona Gur; Kevin G Lynch; James R McKay Journal: J Subst Abuse Treat Date: 2012-11-26