ArticlePsychopharmacology bulletin2025
Prevalence of THC-Positive Urine Drug Screens in Patients Receiving Chronic Opioid Therapy: A Retrospective Review.
Article in Psychopharmacology bulletin, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose of Study: This retrospective review aimed to evaluate the prevalence of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-positive urine drug screens (UDS) in patients undergoing chronic opioid therapy (COT) for chronic pain at a single academic institution. With a growing national trend toward cannabis legalization and increased public access to marijuana for medical and recreational purposes, understanding the intersection between THC use and opioid prescribing practices is essential. The presence of THC on UDS has clinical, legal, and ethical implications, especially in regions where cannabis remains illegal. This study sought to quantify the prevalence of THC positivity in patients receiving COT for chronic pain. Findings: A total of 244 UDS results were reviewed from January 1, 2024, to December 31, 2024. Among these, 24 patients (9.8%) tested positive for THC. Documentation and clinical responses to positive results varied, with some providers documenting patient counseling, while others did not acknowledge the result in the medical record. In a small subset of cases, positive THC findings contributed to changes in opioid therapy, including tapering or discontinuation. Conclusion: THC-positive UDS results are relatively common among patients receiving chronic opioid therapy, highlighting the increasing prevalence of cannabis use in this population. These findings align with prior literature and reinforce the need for individualized, non-punitive approaches to care. Routine screening, consistent documentation, and open communication about cannabis use are essential components of effective opioid risk stratification, safe prescribing practices, and informed treatment planning. These considerations are critical in regions where recreational marijuana remains illegal, which may further influence provider decision-making regarding ongoing opioid therapy.
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.