Panagiota Kitsantas1, Salman M Aljoudi2, Gilbert Gimm2. 1. Department of Health Administration and Policy, George Mason University, 4400 University Dr., MS 1J3, Fairfax, VA, 22030-4444, USA. pkitsant@gmu.edu. 2. Department of Health Administration and Policy, George Mason University, 4400 University Dr., MS 1J3, Fairfax, VA, 22030-4444, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: While perinatal marijuana use is increasing, limited research exists related to its use during pregnancy among vulnerable subpopulations of women with disabilities. The purpose of this study is to assess marijuana use in pregnant U.S. women with disabilities. METHODS: The analytic sample using 2015-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) data included 3657 pregnant women. Descriptive statistics were performed and adjusted logistic regression models estimated the size and direction of the association between the type of disability and marijuana use. RESULTS: Approximately 13.0% of pregnant women with disabilities used marijuana in the past month, which was higher than pregnant women without disabilities (4.4%). The highest prevalence of past month marijuana use was observed among pregnant women with sensory disabilities (17.2%) followed by women with cognitive disabilities (14.6%) and daily living limitations (11.7%). Marijuana use was also associated with younger age (≤ 25 years old), Black non-Hispanic, high school education or less, non-married, and past month alcohol/tobacco use. Overall, pregnant women with any disability, and particularly those with sensory disabilities (AOR 2.32, 95% CI 1.21, 4.47), were significantly more likely (AOR 1.65, 95% CI 1.02, 2.69) to use marijuana than their counterparts without disabilities. CONCLUSIONS: The higher prevalence of marijuana use among pregnant women with disabilities in this study supports the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommendations for universal screening of maternal substance use. Screening for marijuana use in vulnerable populations is crucial and it may require training of health care providers to administer such screenings to women with disabilities.
OBJECTIVES: While perinatal marijuana use is increasing, limited research exists related to its use during pregnancy among vulnerable subpopulations of women with disabilities. The purpose of this study is to assess marijuana use in pregnant U.S. women with disabilities. METHODS: The analytic sample using 2015-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) data included 3657 pregnant women. Descriptive statistics were performed and adjusted logistic regression models estimated the size and direction of the association between the type of disability and marijuana use. RESULTS: Approximately 13.0% of pregnant women with disabilities used marijuana in the past month, which was higher than pregnant women without disabilities (4.4%). The highest prevalence of past month marijuana use was observed among pregnant women with sensory disabilities (17.2%) followed by women with cognitive disabilities (14.6%) and daily living limitations (11.7%). Marijuana use was also associated with younger age (≤ 25 years old), Black non-Hispanic, high school education or less, non-married, and past month alcohol/tobacco use. Overall, pregnant women with any disability, and particularly those with sensory disabilities (AOR 2.32, 95% CI 1.21, 4.47), were significantly more likely (AOR 1.65, 95% CI 1.02, 2.69) to use marijuana than their counterparts without disabilities. CONCLUSIONS: The higher prevalence of marijuana use among pregnant women with disabilities in this study supports the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommendations for universal screening of maternal substance use. Screening for marijuana use in vulnerable populations is crucial and it may require training of health care providers to administer such screenings to women with disabilities.
Authors: Shayna N Conner; Victoria Bedell; Kim Lipsey; George A Macones; Alison G Cahill; Methodius G Tuuli Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Luke E Grzeskowiak; Jessica A Grieger; Prabha Andraweera; Emma J Knight; Shalem Leemaqz; Lucilla Poston; Lesley McCowan; Louise Kenny; Jenny Myers; James J Walker; Gustaaf A Dekker; Claire T Roberts Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2020-05-25 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Qiana L Brown; Aaron L Sarvet; Dvora Shmulewitz; Silvia S Martins; Melanie M Wall; Deborah S Hasin Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-01-10 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Mohammad R Hayatbakhsh; Vicki J Flenady; Kristen S Gibbons; Ann M Kingsbury; Elizabeth Hurrion; Abdullah A Mamun; Jake M Najman Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2011-12-21 Impact factor: 3.756
Authors: Tessa L Crume; Ashley L Juhl; Ashley Brooks-Russell; Katelyn E Hall; Erica Wymore; Laura M Borgelt Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2018-03-28 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Daniel J Corsi; Jessy Donelle; Ewa Sucha; Steven Hawken; Helen Hsu; Darine El-Chaâr; Lise Bisnaire; Deshayne Fell; Shi Wu Wen; Mark Walker Journal: Nat Med Date: 2020-08-10 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Betsy Dickson; Chanel Mansfield; Maryam Guiahi; Amanda A Allshouse; Laura M Borgelt; Jeanelle Sheeder; Robert M Silver; Torri D Metz Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 7.661