Recreational Cannabis Use Before and After Legalization in Women With Pelvic Pain
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence and characteristics of recreational cannabis use in women with pelvic pain, and to examine the influence of cannabis legalization on these parameters. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of a prospective registry of women with self-reported moderate-to-severe pelvic pain referred to a tertiary care clinic in Vancouver, Canada, 2013–2019. We excluded patients aged 18 years or younger and those with unknown data on cannabis use. Demographic, clinical, and validated questionnaire data were extracted for two main analyses: 1) comparison of current cannabis users with current nonusers, and 2) comparison of current cannabis users who entered the registry before cannabis legalization (October 17, 2018) with those who entered the registry on or after legalization. RESULTS: Overall, 14.9% (509/3,426) of patients were classified as current cannabis users. Compared with nonusers, cannabis users were younger ( P <.001), had lower levels of education ( P <.001) and lower household income ( P <.001), were taking opioids ( P <.001), antiinflammatories ( P =.003), neuromodulators ( P =.020), and herbal medications ( P <.001) more frequently. They had worse questionnaire scores for depression, anxiety, pain catastrophizing, quality of life, and pelvic pain severity ( P <.001 for all). After cannabis legalization, prevalence of current cannabis use increased from 13.3% (366/2,760) to 21.5% (143/666) ( P <.001). Compared with prelegalization, postlegalization users were associated with higher levels of education ( P <.001), worse anxiety ( P =.036), and worse pain catastrophizing ( P <.001) scores. They were taking fewer antiinflammatories ( P <.001), neuroleptics ( P =.027) and daily opioids or narcotics ( P =.026), but more herbal medications ( P =.010). CONCLUSION: Recreational cannabis use increased among patients with pelvic pain after legalization in Canada. Cannabis users had worse pain-related morbidities. Postlegalization, cannabis users were less likely to require daily opioids compared with cannabis users before legalization. The role, perceived benefits, and possible risks of cannabis for pelvic pain require further investigation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02911090.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Overall, studies examining cannabis use behavior revealed evidence for cannabis use increases following RCL, particularly for young adults (100%), peri-natal users (66%), and certain clinical populations (66%).
“Overall, studies examining cannabis use behavior revealed evidence for cannabis use increases following RCL, particularly for young adults (100%), peri-natal users (66%), and certain clinical populations (66%).47,54,59”
From The Impact of Recreational Cannabis Legalization on Cannabis Use and Associated Outcomes: A Systematic Review (2023) · cites this paper as [59]
Cites
The PHQ-9: Validity of a brief depression severity measure
Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., & Williams, J. B. W. (2001) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x · Cited by 44,910 · see citing works
Chronic Pelvic Pain: Prevalence, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Economic Correlates
Mathias, S. (1996) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1016/0029-7844(95)00458-0 · Cited by 1,074 · see citing works
Guideline for opioid therapy and chronic noncancer pain
Busse, J. W., Craigie, S., Juurlink, D. N., Buckley, D. N., Wang, L., Couban, R. J., Agoritsas, T., Akl, E. A., Carrasco-Labra, A., Cooper, L., et al. (2017) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.170363 · Cited by 707 · see citing works
Prevalence of Chronic Pelvic Pain Among Women: An Updated Review
Ahangari, A. (2014) · Pain Physician · doi:10.36076/ppj.2014/17/e141 · Cited by 437 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Farrelly, K. N., Wardell, J. D., Marsden, E., Scarfe, M. L., Najdzionek, P., Turna, J., & MacKillop, J. (2023) · Substance Abuse Research and Treatment · doi:10.1177/11782218231172054 · Cited by 148 · see citing works
- Authors
- Geoffrion, R., Yang, E. C., Koenig, N. A., Brotto, L. A., Barr, A. M., Lee, T., Allaire, C., Bedaiwy, M. A., & Yong, P. J.
- Affiliations
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Published
- 2020-12-01
- Volume
- 137
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 91-99
- ISSN
- 0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3107976162
- Cited by
- 21
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2
- FWCI
- 1.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Keywords
- recreational cannabis use, cannabis legalization, pelvic pain, women, opioid use, pain catastrophizing, anxiety, herbal medicine, anti-inflammatory agents, quality of life
- MeSH terms
- Marijuana Use, Recreational Drug Use, Adult, Female, Humans, Retrospective Studies, Pelvic Pain, Young Adult
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