ArticleSports health
Cannabis Use Disorder Not Associated With Opioid Analgesic Use or Patient-Reported Outcomes After ACL Reconstruction: A Retrospective Matched-Cohort Analysis.
Article in Sports health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- How Are We Matching in ACL Reconstruction Research? A Systematic Review of Methods, Reporting, and Covariate Selection.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare opioid analgesic use and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) between patients with and without cannabis use disorder (CUD). HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that patients with CUD would have greater postoperative opioid usage with comparable improvement in PROs. STUDY
designRetrospective matched-cohort study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3.
methodsWe identified patients with CUD who underwent primary ACLR at a single center and had minimum 3-month follow-up. Patients with CUD were propensity score matched 1:1 to non-CUD controls with respect to age, sex, and follow-up time. Total refills, days supply, and morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) of opioid analgesics prescribed were calculated for up to 1 year postoperatively. Patient-Reported Outcome Information System (PROMIS) instruments were used to assess PROs. Opioid use and outcomes were compared between CUD and control groups using Mann-Whitney
resultsA total of 104 patients with CUD were matched to 104 controls. Both groups were majority male (65.4% male, 34.6% female). The CUD group had a mean age of 29.9 years and mean follow-up time of 16.1 months. There was no significant intergroup difference in opioid prescription rates (CUD 82.7% vs control 83.7%,
conclusionThere were no significant differences detected in opioid usage or PRO improvement after ACLR between patients with CUD and those without. However, because a sample size was not determined a priori, a larger sample may show a difference. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: CUD does not appear to correlate with inferior outcomes after ACLR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.