Cited by 26Trauma and Emergency Care StudiesCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchPoisoning and overdose treatments

Marijuana use and outcomes in adult and pediatric trauma patients after legalization in California

Grigorian, A., Lester, E., Lekawa, M., Figueroa, C., Kuza, C.M., Dolich, M., Schubl, S.D., Barrios, C. +1 more·2019·The American Journal of Surgery

Abstract

Background Marijuana has become legal in eight states since 2012. We hypothesized the incidence of marijuana-positive trauma patients and rate of mortality has increased post-legalization. Methods A single level-I trauma center was used to identify patients screening positive for marijuana on urine-toxicology. Patients in the pre-legalization and post-legalization periods were compared. Results In the pre-legalization cohort 9.4% were marijuana-positive versus 11.0% in the post-legalization cohort (p = 0.001). Marijuana-positive patients post-legalization had higher rates of critical trauma activation (20.0% vs. 15.0%, p = 0.01) and mortality (2.6% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.03). In the pediatric (age 12-17) subgroup, the incidence of marijuana-positive patients did not change after legalization (pre: 39.3%, post: 46.4%, p = 0.24). Conclusion The incidence of marijuana-positive trauma patients increased post-legalization. Adult marijuana-positive trauma patients post-legalization were more likely to meet criteria for critical trauma activation and have a higher mortality rate. A subgroup of pediatric patients had an alarmingly high rate of marijuana use. Summary The rate of marijuana use among trauma patients increased post-legalization in California. The rate of critical trauma activation also increased as well as the mortality rate.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2019.08.020

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The empirical literature suggests RCL is associated with increased cannabis-related emergency visits and other health consequences (eg, trauma-related cases).

    “In terms of health outcomes, the empirical literature suggests RCL is associated with increased cannabis-related emergency visits24,67,70,76 and other health consequences (eg, trauma-related cases 57 ).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grigorian, A., Lester, E., Lekawa, M., Figueroa, C., Kuza, C. M., Dolich, M., Schubl, S. D., Barrios, C., & Nahmias, J.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
  • University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author
Grigorian, A.
Venue
The American Journal of Surgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-12
Volume
218
Issue
6
Pages
1189-1194
ISSN
0002-9610 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2972833646
Cited by
26
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1
FWCI
3.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The American Journal of Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Poisoning and overdose treatments
Keywords
cannabis use, cannabis legalization, trauma patients, trauma mortality, pediatric trauma, urine toxicology
MeSH terms
Marijuana Use, Adolescent, Adult, California, Child, Female, Humans, Male, Registries, Trauma Centers, Wounds and Injuries, Incidence, Substance-Related Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review