- Our online table of contents is updated at least twice each day. Read all articles published in the last 7 days.
- You can use bmj.com to help you with your continuing medical education. Find out about CME/CPD credits for BMJ articles
- Keep up to date with cardiology: Access the latest cardiovascular medicine resources from across BMJ Group.
- OPEN ACCESS: All research articles are freely available online, with no word limit. Find out more about the BMJ's open access policy. Submit your paper.
- Find out how study types differ in our How to read a paper section.
- Impact factor latest: The BMJ's impact factor is now 17.215. Submit your paper to the world's fourth most cited general medical journal.
Recent rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. Although a selection of rapid responses will be included as edited readers' letters in the weekly print issue of the BMJ, their first appearance online means that they are published articles. If you need the url (web address) of an individual response, perhaps for citation purposes, simply click on the response headline and copy the url from the browser window.
Displaying 1-4 out of 4 published
13 March 2012
Asbridge et al (1) have proven that acute consumption of cannabis is an independent risk factor for motor vehicle accident (MVA) and appears to also impact the severity of a crash. Perhaps of most importance to practitioners however are the DVLA guidelines on cannabis use.
The DVLA is not just concerned with acute cannabis use but also ongoing use of the drug. Current DVLA guidelines require a person to report to the DVLA any persistent use or dependence on cannabis. This will result in a minimum sixth month revocation of their driving license, and often a urine or blood test to prove abstinence before a licence will be returned (2).
Evidence shows that only a minority (14/101) of psychiatrists who are used to seeing patients with addictions were aware of the driving regulations in relation to cannabis use (3). It seems that discussion about driving regulations is often poor except for a few well recognised cases such as fits (4); however doctor’s duties include discussing suitability for driving when a patient discloses information such as cannabis use.
Cannabis use is extremely common especially amongst the young (5). However I believe the number of users counselled of their obligation to inform the DVLA of their use is negligible. Currently the responsibility rests with the driver to self report, and any decision by a doctor to report a patient to the DVLA must be weighed against the ethical and legal implications and the potential loss of patient trust and openness. Whilst many would choose not to in the situation of cannabis use they would feel differently about an epileptic who chooses to drive, however the law states that both should result in the DVLA being notified. Asbridge et al proves that cannabis use whilst driving increases risk and puts other road uses at risk of potential harm.
1/. Asbridge M, Hayden JA, Cartwright JL. Acute cannabis consumption and motor vehicle collision risk: systematic review of observational studies and meta-analysis. BMJ 2012;344:e536
3/. Thompson P, Nelson D. DVLA regulations concerning driving and psychiatric disorders: Knowledge and attitudes of psychiatrists. Psychiatric Bulletin 1996, 20:323-325
4/. Frampton A. Who can drive home from the emergency department? A
questionnaire based study of emergency physicians’ knowledge of DVLA guidelines. Emergency Medical Journal 2003;20:526–530
5/. Degenhardt L, Chiu WT, Sampson N, et al .Toward a global view of alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, and cocaine use: findings from the WHO World Mental Health Surveys. PLoS Med. 2008 Jul 1;5(7):e141.
Competing interests: None declared
Doncaster & Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS foundation trust, Doncaster Royal Infirmary
Click to like:
28 February 2012
Cannabis use is common (1) and according to the recent metanalysis by Ashbridge, et al (2) is a risk factor for road traffic accidents. Cannabis is often consumed in the evening, and it is known that accidents are more frequent between the hours of 2 – 7am (3,4). This increased frequency of accidents has been considered to be due to the cumulative effects of sleep deprivation and the trough of performance related to the circadian system, as the reduction in performance after 17 hours of wakefulness is equivalent to that seen in subjects with a blood alcohol level of 0,05% (5). However undiagnosed drug use may also contribute.
Ashbridge et al point out that confounders were not controlled for in many of the studies they included in their metanalysis. We suggest that sleep deprivation and circadian rhythm phase may interact with the effects of cannabis, creating a greatly increased risk of accident. Further research should include the time of consumption, sleep habits and the time of accidents in order to better understand the contributions of different risk factors.
1. Degenhardt L, Chiu WT, Sampson N, et al .Toward a global view of alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, and cocaine use: findings from the WHO World Mental Health Surveys. PLoS Med. 2008 Jul 1;5(7):e141.
2. Asbridge M, Hayden JA, Cartwright JL Acute cannabis consumption and motor vehicle collision risk: systematic review of observational studies and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2012 Feb 9;344:e536. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e536.
3. Horne JA, Reyner LA Sleep related vehicle accidents. BMJ. 1995 Mar 4;310:565-7.
4. Garbarino S, Nobili L, Beelke M, De Carli F, Ferrillo F.The contributing role of sleepiness in highway vehicle accidents. Sleep. 2001 Mar 15;24(2):203-6.
5. Dawson D, Reid K. Fatigue, alcohol and performance impairment. Nature 1997;388: 235.
Competing interests: None declared
Hôpital Raymond Poincaré, 104 Boulevard Raymond Poincaré, 92380 Garches, FRANCE
Click to like:
21 February 2012
This meta-analysis confirms the statistical association of the presence of active metabolites of cannabis in drivers and an increased frequency of motor vehicle collisions. It shows the difficulty of extracting good, meaningful, scientific results from the plethora of publications on this subject, as from their initial search revealing 2,975 papers, they were only able to include nine in their studies.
What are the medico-legal implications of driving with active cannabinoids in the body? This review does not discuss the difficulties of relating the concentration of active 9-THC to impairment and accidents.
In the UK at present, cases often come to court with only the inactive carboxy metabolite being measured in the urine and without any impairment testing.
If either a per se limit or zero tolerance was established, active blood concentration of 9-THC will have to be measured in the blood, but this, often due to variability, does not predict effect. Laboratory testing shows greater impairment than road testing.
A study by Berghaus(1) et al showed that cannabis impaired skills which are important for driving and showed that in terms of blood levels, in which 50% of results were significantly deteriorated, this ranged from 6 ng/ml for tracking and 15 ng/ml for reaction time, simulator driving being 13 ng/ml.
THC impairment predominates in the absorption phase of the cannabis and frequent users reveal less impairment than infrequent consumers.
Drivers are more able to compensate their deficit than subjects who consume alcohol. The maximum high is achieved later than the maximum THC concentration.
In an effort to try to determine a concentration above which drivers are more likely than not to be impaired, a study by Khiabani(2) et al noted that the median blood concentration of apprehended drivers was 2.2 ng/ml with a very wide range of 0.3 to 45.3 ng/ml.
54% of the apprehended drivers were judged impaired. There was no difference in concentration of THC between regular and non-regular users, but regular users were less often judged to be impaired; 32% versus 55% and there was considerable overlap in the drug concentrations of impaired and non-impaired drivers, despite the significant relationship between the two.
Impaired drivers had a median concentration of 2.5 ng/ml with a range of 0.3 to 45.3 and non impaired drivers a medium of 1.9 ng/ml with a range of 0.32 to 24.8.
When drivers were grouped for THC concentration, there was a definite trend and correlation between increase in dose and proportion of drivers’ judged impairment, but there was considerable overlap of the groups.
When people have tried to compare the THC concentration to produce a similar likelihood of impairment to an alcohol concentration over the legal limit, there has been no consensus of opinion.
Grotenhermen(3) et al in 2007 tried to define a limit for driving under the influence of cannabis and suggested that a concentration of between 7 and 10 ng/ml was equivalent to a blood alcohol concentration of 0.05%.
These papers have implications for Sativex, the recently approved cannabinoid tincture which has approval, I believe, in seven countries now for the treatment of patients with moderate to severe spasticity due to Multiple Sclerosis which is said to contain both 9-THC and cannabidiol, although it does contain many more cannabinoids. Due to the effectiveness of medicinal cannabis and indeed Sativex, this list of indications is likely to be considerably expanded to the benefit of patients and will probably include neuropathic pain, pain due to spinal problems and other severe pain.
The ability of Sativex users to drive is to my mind inadequately covered in the approved Summary of Product Characteristics presented by the product licence holders and approved in the UK by the MHRA which is indeed the lead regulatory body for European Sativex approvals. It states ‘Sativex may produce undesirable effects such as dizziness and somnolence which may impair judgement and performance of skilled tasks. Patients should not drive, operate machinery or engage in any hazardous activity if they are experiencing any significant CNS effects such as dizziness or somnolence. Patients should be aware that Sativex has been known to cause a few cases of loss of consciousnesses’.
Given that the measured concentrations of 9-THC with Sativex show a range of 0.97 to 9.34 ng/ml after a single dose administration of four sprays, it is likely that on chronic dosing if more sprays are used, the concentration will be considerably higher, (the SPC indicates up to 12 sprays being used, maybe more) even with the concentrations after four sprays, the range overlaps the concentration where effects are found and a possible per se limit. It is likely to be only a matter of time before a Sativex user has an accident with active 9-THC in the blood. The more successful Sativex is as a treatment, and the wider its indications are, the more likely this is to happen.
In this case, although approved by regulatory agencies, the warning is inadequate as with all other psychoactive medication the patients may not be aware if they are experiencing CNS effects as the effects on psychomotor function will be evident before both the patient is aware and they have more fully fledged symptomatology such as dizziness and somnolence. Indeed the manufacturers and the MHRA rely on the fact that this is a similar wording for other psychoactive substances which affect driving such as the benzodiazepines.
However, to my mind two wrongs don’t make a right and I would strengthen the warnings for Sativex saying that users are advised not to drive and I would have the same warning for benzodiazepines. Hopefully meta-analysis such as the one currently published by the BMJ, will encourage the product licence holders and the regulatory agencies to take this view. The SPC for Sativex does not appear to have taken into consideration the research or medico-legal implications of cannabis.
Dr Malcolm VandenBurg BSc MBBS FISMA FCP FFPM FRCP
(1) Berghaus G, Scheer N, Schmidt P. Effects of cannabis on psychomotor skills and driving performance – a meta-analysis of experimental studies. A meta-analysis of experimental studies. In: Kloeden CN, McLean AJ, editors. Proceedings of the 13th International Council on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety; Adelaide, Australia. 1995.
(2) Khiabani HZ, Bramness JG, Bjørneboe A, Mørland J. Relationship between THC concentration in blood and impairment in apprehended drivers. Traffic Inj Prev. 2006 Jun;7(2):111-6.
(3) Grotenhermen F, Leson G, Berghaus G, Drummer OH, Krüger HP, Longo M, Moskowitz H, Perrine B, Ramaekers JG, Smiley A, Tunbridge R. Developing limits for driving under cannabis. Addiction. 2007 Dec;102(12):1910-7. Epub 2007 Oct 4.
Competing interests: Dr VandenBurg has given many opinions to the criminal, civil and family courts on the effects of cannabis, including the effect of cannabis on driving. Dr VandenBurg was, between 1973 and 1978, the Medical Advisor to Release, but does not currently support the complete decriminalisation of cannabis without adequate additional safeguards in place.
Consultrum, 4 Western Esplanade, Brighton BN41 1WE
Click to like:
17 February 2012
Cannabis Indica is known to cause mental sickness defined addiction. Addicts are rarely prone to accidents, but initial and higher doses are known for imbalance, confusion, hallucination and accidents. Liver is damaged early and consumers die early often in young age bellow fifty. How this toxic drug cures polarity and cancer in USA is subject to ongoing observations.
Competing interests: None declared
JNMC AMU Aligarh, JNMC AMU Aligarh, India
Click to like: