What topics does this cannabis study cover?

This study covers research on: Addiction.

Where was this research published?

Published in Addiction (Abingdon, England) on August 2, 2026.

Medical cannabis rules may change how dependence is diagnosed

Q: What did this research study find?

Among **2,054** Australian medical-cannabis users, **31.2%** met the study’s threshold for any *Prescription Cannabis Use Disorder* and **11.7%** met the threshold for moderate-to-severe disorder.

Cannabis use disorder in patients prescribed medical cannabis-Should we consider prescription cannabis use disorder as a new diagnostic condition?

Addiction (Abingdon, England) • August 2, 2026 • Highly Relevant

🤖

AI Summary

This Australian study examined whether standard Cannabis Use Disorder (CUD) criteria fit people using prescribed medical cannabis. It analyzed an anonymous online survey of 2,054 adults who had used prescribed cannabis for a health condition during the previous 12 months. Nearly half reported using cannabis only as prescribed, while the remainder reported at least some use outside their prescription instructions.

When the researchers used a proposed Prescription Cannabis Use Disorder (Pr-CUD) framework—excluding tolerance and withdrawal for people using cannabis exactly as prescribed—31.2% met the threshold for any Pr-CUD and 11.7% met the threshold for moderate-to-severe Pr-CUD. Among people using cannabis only as prescribed, rates were lower under the nine-item framework than under the standard 11-item criteria: 9% versus 20% for any disorder and 2% versus 5% for moderate-to-severe disorder. The authors conclude that conventional CUD criteria may overestimate problems in strictly medical use and that prescription-specific criteria could have important clinical and policy implications.

💡 Key Findings

Among 2,054 Australian medical-cannabis users, 31.2% met the study’s threshold for any Prescription Cannabis Use Disorder and 11.7% met the threshold for moderate-to-severe disorder.

Good

65%

For people using cannabis only as prescribed, the proposed nine-item Pr-CUD framework produced lower rates than standard criteria: 9% vs 20% for any disorder and 2% vs 5% for moderate-to-severe disorder.

Good

70%

The authors conclude that standard Cannabis Use Disorder criteria, developed primarily around illicit use, may not be appropriate for people using medical cannabis under prescribed conditions.

Good

70%

The findings suggest that prescription-specific diagnostic criteria could affect clinical assessment and medical-cannabis policy in jurisdictions where cannabis is legally prescribed.

Good

60%

📄 Original Abstract

The introduction of prescribed medical cannabis in many parts of the world raises issues regarding how we conceptualise Cannabis Use Disorders (CUD). The Diagnostic Statistical Manual Version 5 (DSM5) provides a framework for 'Prescription Cannabis Use Disorder' (Pr-CUD) when a person is using medical cannabis only-as-prescribed, by excluding tolerance and withdrawal items from the diagnosis - with 9 instead of 11 diagnostic criteria. In this study, we compared the 12-month prevalence rates of CUD in a sample of people prescribed medical cannabis in Australia by a medical or nurse practitioner, according to whether we use conventional DSM5 11-items for 'CUD' versus 9-items for 'Pr-CUD'. Secondary analysis of data from CAMS22 Survey - an online anonymous cross-sectional survey of people self-reporting use of medical cannabis within the past 12 months. 2054 adults using prescribed medical cannabis in the preceding 12 months in Australia for a health condition. Consumer characteristics, indications and patterns of medical and non-medical cannabis use, self-reported DSM5 criteria for CUD. 2054 participants reported using prescribed medical cannabis in the past 12 months, of which 986 (48%) reported using cannabis only as prescribed, and 1068 (52%) reported using cannabis not as prescribed. By applying 9-item DSM5 CUD criteria for participants using cannabis as prescribed and 11-item criteria for participants using cannabis not as prescribed, 640/2054 (31.2%) met Any P-CUD (>2 criteria) and 241/2054 (11.7%) met Moderate-Severe P-CUD (>4 criteria) thresholds. This is in contrast to 748/2054 (36.4%) met Any CUD and 273/2054 (13.3%) Moderate-Severe CUD when using 11 DSM5 criteria for all participants. Amongst the 986 participants using cannabis as prescribed, Pr-CUD (9-item) prevalence was statistically significantly lower than under the 11-item framework, both for Any CUD (9% [Pr-CUD] vs 20% [11-item]; % difference = 11.8 [95% confidence interval (CI): 8.3, 15.8]; odds ratio (OR) = 1.3 [CI: 1.1, 1.4]) and Moderate-Severe CUD (2% [Pr-CUD] vs 5% [11-item]; % difference = 2.9 [CI: 1.4, 5.0]; OR = 2.6 [CI: 1.6, 4.4]). Diagnostic Statistical Manual Version 5 cannabis use disorder (CUD) diagnostic criteria developed for illicit cannabis use may not be appropriate for people using medical cannabis under prescribed conditions. CUD rates are statistically significantly reduced when the 'Prescription Cannabis Use Disorder' framework is applied to people only using cannabis products in accordance with the conditions identified on their prescription (including dose, route of administration and indication). This has considerable clinical and policy implications in settings where medical cannabis is legally available under a prescription model.