Table 3.

Self-reported approach to customers with suspected cannabis use disorder

	All respondents			Non-clinicians only
	Yes, n(%) n=434	State medicalization scorea,b (aOR [95% CI])	Statewide adult usea,b (aOR [95% CI])	State medicalization scorea,c (aOR [95% CI])	Statewide adult usea,c (aOR [95% CI])
What do you do when you encounter a customer who you suspect has a cannabis use disorder?
I have never encountered a customer who I suspected had cannabis use disorder	214 (49.3%)	1.1 (1.0-1.4)	1.1 (0.6-2.1)	1.1 (0.9-1.4)	1.0 (0.6-1.7)
Discuss purchasing cannabis products that may help with the cannabis use disorder	119 (27.4%)	0.8 (0.7-1.0)	0.7 (0.4-1.3)	0.9 (0.7-1.1)	0.7 (0.4-1.3)
I do not believe cannabis is addictive	114 (26.3%)	0.9 (0.8-1.1)	1.1 (0.6-1.9)	0.9 (0.7-1.1)	1.1 (0.6-2.0)
Refer to a physician or other healthcare professional	83 (19.1%)	0.9 (0.8-1.1)	0.6 (0.3-1.1)	0.9 (0.7-1.1)	0.5 (0.3-1.1)
I do not do anything differently for such customers	64 (14.7%)	0.9 (0.8-1.2)	2.0 (1.0-3.9)	1.0 (0.8-1.3)	2.0 (1.0-4.2)
I have never heard of cannabis use disorder	58 (13.4%)	1.0 (0.8-1.2)	1.5 (0.8-2.9)	1.0 (0.8-1.3)	1.8 (0.9-3.7)

Abbreviations: aOR Adjusted Odds Ratio, CI confidence interval

This table presents a series of mixed effects multivariable regression models in which each row represents the dependent variable with each column representing and independent variable in separate regression models. A random effect was included for state to account for clustering

^aRegression full model includes: state medicalization score per 10-point increment; statewide adult use (yes/no [ref]); age per 10-point increment; role (budtender [ref], manager, physician/NP/PA, pharmacist, other); years working in cannabis industry (categorical- <6 months [ref], 6 months-1 year, 1-2 years, >2 years, no response); sales commission (yes/no); Education (categorical)

^b n=428, ^c n=351

Bolded values have p-value<0.05

‘Other, please describe’ is not shown