| Title |
Patterns of medicinal cannabis use, strain analysis, and substitution effect among patients with migraine, headache, arthritis, and chronic pain in a medicinal cannabis cohort
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Headache and Pain, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s10194-018-0862-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eric P. Baron, Philippe Lucas, Joshua Eades, Olivia Hogue |
| Abstract |
Medicinal cannabis registries typically report pain as the most common reason for use. It would be clinically useful to identify patterns of cannabis treatment in migraine and headache, as compared to arthritis and chronic pain, and to analyze preferred cannabis strains, biochemical profiles, and prescription medication substitutions with cannabis. Via electronic survey in medicinal cannabis patients with headache, arthritis, and chronic pain, demographics and patterns of cannabis use including methods, frequency, quantity, preferred strains, cannabinoid and terpene profiles, and prescription substitutions were recorded. Cannabis use for migraine among headache patients was assessed via the ID Migraine™ questionnaire, a validated screen used to predict the probability of migraine. Of 2032 patients, 21 illnesses were treated with cannabis. Pain syndromes accounted for 42.4% (n = 861) overall; chronic pain 29.4% (n = 598;), arthritis 9.3% (n = 188), and headache 3.7% (n = 75;). Across all 21 illnesses, headache was a symptom treated with cannabis in 24.9% (n = 505). These patients were given the ID Migraine™ questionnaire, with 68% (n = 343) giving 3 "Yes" responses, 20% (n = 102) giving 2 "Yes" responses (97% and 93% probability of migraine, respectively). Therefore, 88% (n = 445) of headache patients were treating probable migraine with cannabis. Hybrid strains were most preferred across all pain subtypes, with "OG Shark" the most preferred strain in the ID Migraine™ and headache groups. Many pain patients substituted prescription medications with cannabis (41.2-59.5%), most commonly opiates/opioids (40.5-72.8%). Prescription substitution in headache patients included opiates/opioids (43.4%), anti-depressant/anti-anxiety (39%), NSAIDs (21%), triptans (8.1%), anti-convulsants (7.7%), muscle relaxers (7%), ergots (0.4%). Chronic pain was the most common reason for cannabis use, consistent with most registries. The majority of headache patients treating with cannabis were positive for migraine. Hybrid strains were preferred in ID Migraine™, headache, and most pain groups, with "OG Shark", a high THC (Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol)/THCA (tetrahydrocannabinolic acid), low CBD (cannabidiol)/CBDA (cannabidiolic acid), strain with predominant terpenes β-caryophyllene and β-myrcene, most preferred in the headache and ID Migraine™ groups. This could reflect the potent analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and anti-emetic properties of THC, with anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties of β-caryophyllene and β-myrcene. Opiates/opioids were most commonly substituted with cannabis. Prospective studies are needed, but results may provide early insight into optimizing crossbred cannabis strains, synergistic biochemical profiles, dosing, and patterns of use in the treatment of headache, migraine, and chronic pain syndromes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 120 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 29 | 24% |
| Canada | 9 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 5% |
| France | 5 | 4% |
| New Zealand | 5 | 4% |
| Australia | 4 | 3% |
| Portugal | 3 | 3% |
| Comoros | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 6% |
| Unknown | 48 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 100 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 14 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 3% |
| Scientists | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 660 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 660 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 105 | 16% |
| Researcher | 86 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 65 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 49 | 7% |
| Other | 47 | 7% |
| Other | 102 | 15% |
| Unknown | 206 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 144 | 22% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 42 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 37 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 36 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 35 | 5% |
| Other | 129 | 20% |
| Unknown | 237 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 243. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 January 2024.
All research outputs
#157,078
of 25,770,491 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Headache and Pain
#21
of 1,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,454
of 345,255 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Headache and Pain
#1
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,770,491 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,560 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,255 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.