Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29330776›Full record

ArticleDrugs in R&D2018

Second-Hand Exposure of Staff Administering Vaporised Cannabinoid Products to Patients in a Hospital Setting.

Nadia Solowij, Peter Galettis, Samantha J Broyd, Peter de Krey, Jennifer H Martin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drugs in R&D, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nadia SolowijSchool of Psychology, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, 2522, Australia. nadia@uow.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5222-5637
Peter GalettisThe Australian Centre for Cannabinoid Clinical and Research Excellence, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6785-2529
Samantha J BroydSchool of Psychology, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, 2522, Australia.
Peter de KreyDiscipline of Clinical Pharmacology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Jennifer H MartinThe Australian Centre for Cannabinoid Clinical and Research Excellence, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8614-0199
University of Newcastle Australia · AUUniversity of Wollongong · AU

Funding

Australian Research Council FT1101007752National Health and Medical Research Council APP1007593
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn many health settings, administration of medicinal cannabis poses significant implementation barriers including drug storage and safety for administering staff and surrounding patients. Different modes of administration also provide different yet potentially significant issues. One route that has become of clinical interest owing to the rapid onset of action and patient control of the inhaled amount (via breath timing and depth) is that of vaporisation of cannabinoid products. Although requiring a registered therapeutic device for administration, this is a relatively safe method of intrapulmonary administration that may be particularly useful for patients with difficulty swallowing, and for those in whom higher concentrations of cannabinoids are needed quickly. A particular concern expressed to researchers undertaking clinical trials in the hospital is that other patients, nurses, and clinical or research staff may be exposed to second-hand vapours in the course of administering vaporised products to patients.

objectiveThe objective of this study was to take samples from two research staff involved in administering vaporised Δ

methodsBlood samples from two research staff were taken during the exposure period for three participants (cannabis users) over the course of approximately 2.5 h and analysed using tandem mass spectrometry.

resultsBlood samples taken over a vaporised period revealed exposure below the limit of detection for Δ

conclusionsThese results are reassuring for hospital and clinical trial practices with staff administering vaporised cannabinoid products, and helpful to ethics committees wishing to quantify risk.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelAdministration, InhalationCannabinoidsFemaleHumansMedical MarijuanaSalivaCannabinoidsMedical Marijuana

Identifiers

PMID29330776
PMCPMC5833909
OpenAlexW2785235976

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.