Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2026 Jan 21.
Published in final edited form as: J Addict Med. 2019 Jul-Aug;13(4):287–294. doi: 10.1097/ADM.0000000000000493

Opioid and Cannabis Co-Use among Adults With Chronic Pain: Relations to Substance Misuse, Mental Health, and Pain Experience

Andrew H Rogers 1, Jafar Bakhshaie 1, Julia D Buckner 1, Michael F Orr 1, Daniel J Paulus 1, Joseph W Ditre 1, Michael J Zvolensky 1
PMCID: PMC12818883  NIHMSID: NIHMS2132953  PMID: 30557213

Abstract

Objectives:

Opioid misuse constitutes a significant public health problem and is associated with a host of negative outcomes. Despite efforts to curb this increasing epidemic, opioids remain the most widely prescribed class of medications. Prescription opioids are often used to treat chronic pain despite the risks associated with use, and chronic pain remains an important factor in understanding this epidemic. Cannabis is another substance that has recently garnered attention in the chronic pain literature, as increasing numbers of individuals use cannabis to manage chronic pain. Importantly, the co-use of substances generally is associated with poorer outcomes than single substance use, yet little work has examined the impact of opioid-cannabis co-use.

Methods:

The current study examined the use of opioids alone, compared to use of opioid and cannabis co-use, among adults (n = 450) with chronic pain on mental health, pain, and substance use outcomes.

Results:

Results suggest that, compared to opioid use alone, opioid and cannabis co-use was associated with elevated anxiety and depression symptoms, as well as tobacco, alcohol, cocaine, and sedative use problems, but not pain experience.

Conclusions:

These findings highlight a vulnerable population of polysubstance users with chronic pain, and indicates the need for more comprehensive assessment and treatment of chronic pain.

Keywords: cannabis, chronic pain, mental health, opioid, substance use

Opioids are currently the most widely prescribed class of medications (mu-opioid receptor agonists; Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2015), and opioid misuse (defined as using a substance other than how it is indicated or prescribed; Butler et al., 2007) constitutes a significant public health problem in the United States (US; Brady et al., 2016). Despite efforts to curb this increasing epidemic, opioid-related overdoses and deaths are at an all-time high (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2016; Nelson and Perrone, 2012). Importantly, opioids are often prescribed for the treatment of chronic pain (Daubresse et al., 2013; Dowell et al., 2016), and despite evidence suggesting that opioids are effective at managing chronic pain in the short term (Chou et al., 2015), opioid use in the context of pain management is associated with increased risk of morbidity and mortality. Specifically, opioid use in the context of chronic pain has been associated with risk of opioid misuse, greater anxiety and depression, increased pain sensitivity, and comorbidity with other substance use disorders (Chou et al., 2009, 2015; Chu et al., 2006; Dowell et al., 2016; Edlund et al., 2007). Empirical evidence further suggests a bi-directional relationship, such that these comorbidities are also associated with increased risk for opioid misuse (Brooner et al., 1997; Wilsey et al., 2008). Collectively, this research highlights the public health importance of examining these comorbidities.

Cannabis is another substance that is often used to manage chronic pain (Manchikanti et al., 2006), and more people have reported access to, and use of cannabis following the legalization for medical purposes in many states (Cerdá et al., 2012). Cannabis plant-derived products include the well know delta-9-THC (cannabinoid receptor-1 agonist), as well as other compounds like cannabidiol (McCarberg and Barkin, 2007). Although preliminary evidence from randomized controlled trials provides evidence for the efficacy of cannabis for pain management (Deshpande et al., 2015; Hill, 2015; Jensen et al., 2015), results remain mixed regarding the long-term consequences of cannabis use, particularly in the context of chronic pain (Deshpande et al., 2015; Hill et al., 2017). For example, in the general population, cannabis use is often associated with elevated mental health problems (Buckner et al., 2010; Grant et al., 2004; Jané-Llopis et al., 2006), increased healthcare costs (Pacula et al., 2008), and changes in pain tolerance (increased, but not better than a benzodiazepine; Raft et al., 1977). However, more recent research suggests there may be some utility in using cannabis to manage pain among individuals with chronic pain conditions (Bar-Lev Schleider et al., 2018).

In general, the co-use of substances, defined as using more than once substance at a time, is associated with greater adverse effects compared to single substance use (Kandel et al., 2001; Weinberger et al., 2010). For example, past work has shown that the risk of using more than one substance (eg, alcohol and tobacco) is greater than the independent risk of using either substance alone (Taylor and Rehm, 2006). Some research suggests that substances may be used together (cocaine and heroin) to induce novel subjective effects that are not experienced during the exclusive use of a single substance (Leri et al., 2003). Research shows that polysubstance use behavior is prominent among youth (Moss et al., 2014), and polysubstance use is generally associated with elevated mental health problems, as well as more severe substance use problems (Kandel et al., 2001; Martinotti et al., 2009). Yet little attention has been paid to the impact of opioid and cannabis co-use, despite increased use of both substances among individuals with chronic pain.

The use of both opioids and cannabis concurrently in response to pain may be possible because of the legalization of cannabis for medical purposes in many states (Bachhuber et al., 2014). This co-use may represent a vulnerability associated with increased risk of morbidity and mortality among individuals with chronic pain. People who use medical cannabis are more likely to report nonmedical use of prescription medications (including prescription pain medications) compared to those who do not use medical cannabis (Caputi and Humphreys, 2018). Additionally, cannabis use has been associated with current opioid misuse, as well as an increased likelihood of future opioid misuse (Fiellin et al., 2013).

Given the dearth of work examining these relations among individuals with chronic pain, there is a critical public health need to better understand the impact of cannabis use in the context of opioid use for chronic pain. Additionally, no research has directly compared individuals who only use opioids to those who use both opioids and cannabis. This limitation is unfortunate, because without this comparison, it is not possible to isolate and quantify the impact of cannabis use in the context of opioid use for chronic pain. Therefore, the current study sought to compare people who use solely opioids to people who co-use opioids and cannabis, among adults with chronic pain. It was hypothesized that, compared to those using opioids without cannabis, those that co-use opioid and cannabis would report elevated opioid misuse, pain experience, anxiety, depression, and other substance use problems, including tobacco, alcohol, cocaine, and sedatives.

METHOD

Measures

Demographics Questionnaire

Participants were asked about their sex, race, age, educational level, annual income, and marital status.

Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test

The Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) is an 8-item questionnaire designed to asses risk a wide range of substance misuse, including tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, among others (Humeniuk et al., 2008). Past work has documented strong psychometric properties for the ASSIST (citation). Participants rate their uses (eg, frequency, urge, problems/consequences) for each substance they use on a 5-point Likert scale. Total scores for each substance is calculated as well as a risk level, where higher scores indicated greater substance involvement, including frequency of use and problems associated with use. In the current study, the question “Have you used Cannabis in the past 3 months,” was used to classify participants as using cannabis or not. Total substance involvement scores for tobacco (α = 0.85), alcohol (α = 0.90), cocaine (α = 0.94), and sedatives (α = 0.88) were calculated by summing all items associated with each substance, and each total score and showed strong internal consistency.

Patient Health Questionnaire-4

The patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) is a 4-item self-report measure, rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (nearly every day). The PHQ-4 is comprised of the PHQ-2 for depression (eg, item) and the GAD-2 (eg, item) for anxiety (Kroenke et al., 2003; Kroenke et al., 2007; Löwe et al., 2005) and the total score and subscales (anxiety and depression) have been previously validated (Löwe et al., 2010). PHQ-4 values that are greater than 5 are considered moderate to severe depression and/or anxiety (Löwe et al., 2010). The total score for depression consists of the sum of the 2 depression items, and the total score for anxiety consists of the sum of the 2 anxiety items. The PHQ-4 anxiety (α = 0.87) and PHQ-4 depression (α = 0.89) subscales were used and showed strong internal consistency.

Current Opioid Misuse Measure

The Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM) derives a total score from 17 items (eg, item) to identify individuals who are exhibiting behaviors of opioid misuse (Butler et al., 2007). Each item is rated on a 5-point scale from 0 (never) to 4 (very often) to create a sum total score (α = 0.97) with excellent internal consistency. Test-retest reliability has been established and construct validity demonstrated with positive correlations for urine toxicology results among individuals with chronic pain (Butler et al., 2007; Wasan et al., 2007).

Severity of Dependence Scale

Severity of Dependence Scale (SDS) is a 5-item (eg, item) measure severity of dependence to opioids (Gossop et al., 1995). Responses are rated on a 4-point scale from 0 (Never) to 3(Always), and all items are summed for a total score (Iraurgi Castillo et al., 2010) and SDS total score was used (α = 0.86) showing strong internal consistency.

Graded Chronic Pain Scale

The Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS) assesses pain intensity and pain disability on an 8-item self-report scale (Von Korff et al., 1992). Past work has demonstrated strong psychometric properties of the GCPS among individuals with chronic pain (Von Korff et al., 1992). Items pertaining to pain severity are rated on 10-point scale from 0 (No pain) to 10 (Pain as bad as could be) and summed, and items pertaining to pain disability are rated on a 10-point scale from 0 (No interference) to 10 (Unable to carry on activities) and summed to create 2 total scores. Higher scores are indicative of more severe and disabling pain. The GCPS pain intensity (α = 0.84) and pain disability (α = 0.91) scales were examined in this study and showed strong internal consistency.

Procedure

All procedures were carried out by means of online data entry. Participants were recruited nationally through Qualtrics, an online survey management system during the summer in 2018. This data collection method has been successfully used in other studies (Zvolensky et al., 2018). Qualtrics Panels accounts that indicated that they have moderate to severe chronic pain (defined by a single item screener asking if participants had experiences persistent, chronic pain for at least 3 months) and currently use opioid pain medication were sent a notification of the current survey. After brief screening for eligibility, interested participants were directed to the online anonymous survey. Informed consent was provided prior to access of the survey, which was estimated to take 30 minutes to complete. Participants could opt to receive compensation for the study in varying forms (eg, cash-based incentives [ie, gift cards], rewards miles, rewards points etc.). Level of compensation was consistent across all forms, and was typically 20% to 35% of the total cost per study complete ($12.00). The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Houston (STUDY00000543).

Participants

Participants were 450 (74.67% female, Mage = 38.59 years, SD = 11.09) adults reporting current opioid use for pain and current chronic pain that persisted for at least 3 months. Additionally, of the 450 participants, 176 participants reported current cannabis co-use (reported cannabis use in the past 3 months). Participants were also eligible if they were between the ages of 18 to 64, and reported moderate to severe pain in the last 4-weeks. Exclusion criteria included being under 18 years of age, a non-English speaker (to ensure comprehension of the study questions), and an inability to give informed, and voluntary, written consent to participant.

The sample was predominately White (77.8%), with 8.7% identifying as Black/African American, 13.1% Hispanic/Latino, 3.3% Native American/Alaska Native, 0.9% Asian/Pacific Islander 2.7% multiracial, and 1.1% other. In terms of education, a little over a fifth (5.8%) did not complete high school, whereas over a quarter of the sample (31.3%) reported attaining a high school diploma, with 22.4% reporting “some college,” and 40.4% having attained an associate degree or higher. The median income bracket was in the range of $35,999 to $49,999.

Analytic Strategy

Analyses were conducted using SPSS version 24. T-tests and χ2 were used to examine differences among sample demographic characteristics. Additionally, analysis of variance analyses were used to examine group differences between people who use opioids alone, and those that co-use opioids and cannabis. Specifically, 10 one way ANCOVAs were conducted to examine mean differences on 10 criterion variables (anxiety, depression, current opioid misuse, severity of opioid dependence, pain intensity, pain disability, and substance use problems [tobacco, alcohol, cocaine, sedatives]), controlling for age, sex, income, and education. Partial η2 was used as a measure of effect size, and estimated marginal mean differences were compared using Least Significant Difference pairwise comparisons. To correct for multiple tests, a Bonferroni corrected P-value of (0.05/10) 0.005 was used.

RESULTS

Descriptive Statistics

Examining demographic differences by opioid only vs co-use status, there were significant gender differences, such that there were more women reporting opioid only use (χ2(2) = 15.84,P < 0.001). Additionally, persons reporting opioid only use were significantly older than those reporting co-use (t = 4.01, df = 448, P < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 0.39). However, there were no significant differences for education level (χ2(7) = 6.83, P = 0.45) or income level (χ2(8) = 10.48, P = 0.23) by cannabis use status (Table 1).

TABLE 1.

Sample Clinical Characteristics

Outcome Cannabis-Opioid Co-Use (n = 176) Opioid-Only Use (n = 274) Significance, P
Age (years, SD) 36.0  10.4 40.2  11.2  <0.001
Race/Ethnicity (%, n)
 White 77.3 136 78.1 214 Ns
 African American/Black 12.5  22  6.2  17 Ns
 Hispanic 18.2  32  9.9  27 Ns
 American Indiana/Alaskan Native  5.9   8  2.6   7 Ns
 Asian/Pacific Islander  1.7   3  0.4   1 Ns
 Multi-Racial  5.9   8  1.9   4 Ns
Sex (Female) (%, n) 64.8 114 81.0 222  <0.001
Open in a new tab

Mental Health

Anxiety

The mean difference between people who use cannabis (Estimated Marginal Mean = 2.33, SE = 0.15) and people who do not use cannabis (Estimated Marginal Mean = 1.56, SE = 0.12) was statistically significant, such that co-use was associated with significantly greater PHQ-4 anxiety total scores (Fig. 1 and Table 2).

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1.

Open in a new tab

Group Estimated Marginal Mean Comparison. Note: * indicates a significant difference at the P< 0.005 level. PHQ-4 Anx—Anxiety, PHQ-4 Dep—Depression, GCPS Intensity—pain intensity, GCPS Disability—pain disability, COMM Total—Current Opioid Misuse, SDS Total—Severity of Opioid Dependence.

TABLE 2.

Test of Between-Subject Effects for Mental Health and Pain Outcomes

Test of Between-Subject Effects
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F P η2
Anxiety
 Age  23.770  1  23.770  6.383  0.012  0.015
 Gender  4.319  1  4.319  1.160  0.282  0.003
 Income  5.706  1  5.706  1.532  0.216  0.004
 Education  33.175  1  33.175  8.909  0.003  0.020
 Cannabis use  57.072  1  57.072  15.326 <0.001  0.034
Depression
 Age  39.028  1  39.028  9.756  0.002  0.022
 Gender  33.882  1  33.882  8.470  0.004  0.019
 Income  13.343  1  13.343  3.335  0.068  0.008
 Education  32.738  1  32.738  8.184  0.004  0.019
 Cannabis use  46.675  1  46.675  11.667  0.001  0.026
Pain intensity
 Age  384.070  1  384.070  13.402  0.000  0.029
 Gender  114.945  1  114.945  4.011  0.046  0.009
 Income  1.580  1  1.580  0.055  0.814  0.000
 Education  14.683  1  14.683  0.512  0.474  0.001
 Cannabis use  47.112  1  47.112  1.644  0.200  0.004
Pain disability
 Age  1531.584  1  1531.584  20.597  0.000  0.044
 Gender  131.531  1  131.531  1.769  0.184  0.004
 Income  275.950  1  275.950  3.711  0.055  0.008
 Education  40.590  1  40.590  0.546  0.460  0.001
 Cannabis use  170.661  1  170.661  2.295  0.131  0.005
Open in a new tab

Depression

Those reporting cannabis co-use (Estimated Marginal Mean = 2.50, SE = 0.15) reported significantly elevated PHQ-4 depression total scores than those reporting opioid only use (Estimated Marginal Mean = 1.80, SE = 0.12).

Pain Experience

Pain Intensity

In terms of GCPS pain intensity scores, we observed no differences between those that co-use (Estimated Marginal Mean = 22.33, SE = 0.41) and those that only use opioids (Estimated Marginal Mean = 21.64, SE = 0.33).

Pain Disability

For GCPS pain disability scores, we observed no differences as a function of co-use (Estimated Marginal Mean = 28.72, SE = 0.67) and opioid only use (Estimated Marginal Mean = 27.41, SE = 0.53).

Substance Use

Current Opioid Misuse

The mean difference between those that use cannabis (Estimated Marginal Mean = 23.97, SE = 1.17) and those that solely use opioids (Estimated Marginal Mean = 13.88, SE = 0.93) was statistically-significant, such that co-use was associated with significantly greater COMM total scores than opioid only use (Table 3).

TABLE 3.

Test of Between-Subject Effects for Substance Use Outcomes

Test of Between-Subject Effects
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F P η2
COMM total
 Age  5812.635  1  5812.635  25.761  0.000  0.055
 Gender  4120.236  1  4120.236  18.261  0.000  0.040
 Income  62.803  1  62.803  0.278  0.598  0.001
 Education  1176.425  1  1176.425  5.214  0.023  0.012
 Cannabis use  9981.223  1  9981.223  44.237 <0.001  0.092
SDS total
 Age  112.946  1  112.946  9.145  0.003  0.021
 Gender  131.922  1  131.922  10.681  0.001  0.024
 Income  0.444  1  0.444  0.036  0.850  0.000
 Education  50.441  1  50.441  4.084  0.044  0.009
 Cannabis use  314.010  1  314.010  25.423 <0.001  0.055
ASSIST tobacco
 Age  197.094  1  197.094  1.999  0.158  0.004
 Gender  0.148  1  0.148  0.002  0.969  0.000
 Income  97.220  1  97.220  0.986  0.321  0.002
 Education  22.283  1  22.283  0.226  0.635  0.001
 Cannabis use  4752.728  1  4752.728  48.197 <0.001  0.098
ASSIST alcohol
 Age  1863.554  1  1863.554  20.978  0.000  0.045
 Gender  1698.906  1  1698.906  19.125  0.000  0.041
 Income  114.052  1  114.052  1.284  0.258  0.003
 Education  202.356  1  202.356  2.278  0.132  0.005
 Cannabis use  4899.610  1  4899.610  55.156 <0.001  0.110
ASSIST cocaine
 Age  454.389  1  454.389  8.102  0.005  0.018
 Gender  608.088  1  608.088  10.842  0.001  0.024
 Income  18.043  1  18.043  0.322  0.571  0.001
 Education  169.398  1  169.398  3.020  0.083  0.007
 Cannabis use  4500.296  1  4500.296  80.239 <0.001  0.153
ASSIST sedatives
 Age  710.169  1  710.169  8.094  0.005  0.018
 Gender  2.567  1  2.567  0.029  0.864  0.000
 Income  176.662  1  176.662  2.013  0.157  0.005
 Education  336.805  1  336.805  3.839  0.051  0.009
 Cannabis use  4659.188  1  4659.188  53.102 <0.001  0.107
Open in a new tab

Severity of Opioid Dependence

Those that co-use cannabis (Estimated Marginal Mean = 5.41, SE = 0.28) reported significantly elevated SDS total scores compared to those that only use opioids (Estimated Marginal Mean = 3.61, SE = 0.22).

Tobacco

As seen in Table 3, people who co-use reported greater ASSIST scores on tobacco (Estimated Marginal Mean = 15.98, SE = 0.77) than those that only use opioids (Estimated Marginal Mean = 9.07, SE = 0.61).

Alcohol

For ASSIST alcohol involvement scores, people reporting co-use of cannabis and opioids reported greater ASSIST alcohol scores (Estimated Marginal Mean = 13.01, SE = 0.73), relative to those using opioids only (Estimated Marginal Mean = 5.99, SE = 0.58).

Cocaine

In terms of ASSIST cocaine involvement scores, people who use cannabis (Estimated Marginal Mean = 7.63, SE = 0.58) reported significantly elevated ASSIST cocaine involvement scores compared to those who solely use opioids (Estimated Marginal Mean = 0.91, SE = 0.46).

Sedatives

In predicting ASSIST sedative involvement scores, those reporting co-use reported significantly elevated ASSIST sedative scores (Estimated Marginal Mean = 11.77, SE = 0.72) compared to those that use opioids only (Estimated Marginal Mean = 4.92, SE = 0.47).

DISCUSSION

The current study investigated the association of opioid and cannabis co-use, compared to opioid use only, among adults with chronic pain, a group at particular risk for opioid and other substance use and related problems (Manchikanti et al., 2006). As hypothesized, results indicated that individuals reporting opioid and cannabis co-use also reported significantly greater anxiety, depression, current opioid misuse, opioid dependence, tobacco-related problems, alcohol-related problems, cocaine-related problems, and sedative-related problems. Importantly, these results were evident after controlling for the variance attributable age, sex, income, and education. Of note, the magnitude of the effects (eta2) for all substance-related variables was medium to large, and small to medium for anxiety and depression. For all significant outcomes, however, it is likely that the results have clinical significance. In particular, although anxiety and depression show small to medium effects, even small elevations in anxiety and depression are associated with poor outcomes, particularly among medical patients, pointing to the importance of even small differences (Katon et al., 2007).

Overall, these results are in line with previous research indicating that individuals with substance co-use tend to report elevated psychiatric and other substance-related issues compared to single drug users (Kandel et al., 2001). These results are also consistent with research indicating that medical cannabis use is associated with higher rates of nonmedical opioid use (Caputi and Humphreys, 2018). The findings from the current study uniquely extend past research by providing a comparison between those that solely use opioids and those reporting co-use of opioids and cannabis in relation to several clinically relevant variables, and identifies a unique vulnerability among people who use opioids that may be associated with overall greater morbidity.

Of note, we observed no significant differences with regard to pain intensity or disability between individuals reporting opioid and cannabis co-use and individuals reporting opioid use only. There are plausible explanations to explain these discrepant findings. First, all of the participants in the current study were individuals reporting chronic pain, and therefore, is it possible that there was pain-related ceiling effect. Additionally, it is possible that the use of cannabis did not alter perception of pain. A significant body of work suggests that chronic opioid use is associated with lower pain tolerance (Tompkins and Campbell, 2011), yet the literature on the effects of cannabis on pain tolerance is limited and mixed. For example, one study found that THC alone (an active ingredient in cannabis) did not impact pain tolerance, only when it was combined with morphine (opioid) that there was a decrease in pain tolerance (Naef et al., 2003). Given that all participants in this study were currently using opioids, it is possible that cannabis may have had little impact on the perception of pain.

Potential clinical implications of these findings include that it may be important for clinicians to assess cannabis use prior to initiating opioids for the treatment of chronic pain. The results from this study suggest that cannabis use in the context of opioid use for chronic pain is associated with significantly worse mental health and substance use outcomes, and there may be particular clinical utility in focusing on cannabis use in this population. For people reporting opioid and cannabis co-use, it may also be important to intervene on the cannabis use (ie, Sherman and McRae-Clark, 2016) and associated mental health/substance use problems prior to the initiation of opioids. Additionally, individuals with a propensity to misuse substances may be more attracted to opioid cannabis co-use (Hawkins et al., 1992) and therefore identifying these individuals before treatment for chronic pain may reduce deleterious consequences of combined use. Finally, it may be equally important to closely monitor individuals with chronic pain and comorbid opioid and cannabis use, and future research should examine the longitudinal impact of opioid and cannabis co-use on substance use and pain outcomes.

The current study is not without limitations. First, the data were cross-sectional, prohibiting causal and temporal inferences. Future research should examine group differences in mental health and substance use outcomes over time for individuals with chronic pain, and examine how interactions between cannabis and opioid use may contribute to the observed findings. Second, we did not assess frequency or quantity of cannabis use, and it is possible that amount of cannabis use may influence the variables examined herein. Future research should collect more detailed information regarding cannabis use (eg, amount of THC and/or CBD), and examine the impact of differential use patterns on mental health and substance-related outcomes. Relatedly, due to data collection limitations, geographic data was not collected. Such information would be useful to better characterize the sample in terms of legalization of cannabis for medical or recreational purposes. Third, the data collected in the current study were exclusively by self-report, and therefore, it is possible that the results are due to shared method variance and biases in reporting, particularly for illicit substances. Future studies should employ multi-method assessments of substance use (eg, urine toxicology) and mental health to confirm the findings from the current study. Fourth, although all participants in the current study were individuals reporting opioid use (confirmed by a single item screener), it is not known what patterns of opioid use individuals engaged in, or whether the cannabis was medically prescribed, and future research should conduct a comprehensive assessment to better understand use patterns. Further, it is possible that the type of chronic pain experienced by participants in the current investigation varied in type, etiology, and intensity, and future research, particularly studies conducted online, should gather comprehensive pain information from study participants. Finally, the current study selected individuals who use cannabis after individuals indicated using cannabis in the past 3 months, and it possible that those individuals are not currently using cannabis. Future research should seek to confirm and extend the current findings with people indicating current cannabis use.

Overall, the results from the current study suggest that, among adults with chronic pain, opioid and cannabis co-use (compared to opioids alone) may be associated with greater anxiety and depression symptoms, more severe opioid dependence, and more tobacco, alcohol, and sedative use problems. The large sample may help the current data to generalize to the population of individuals with chronic pain. Overall, the results from this study highlight a vulnerable population of individuals reporting polysubstance use with chronic pain, and indicates the need for more comprehensive assessment and treatment of chronic pain.

REFERENCES

  1. Bachhuber MA, Saloner B, Cunningham CO, et al. Medical cannabis laws and opioid analgesic overdose mortality in the United States, 1999–2010. JAMA Intern Med 2014;174:1668–1673. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bar-Lev Schleider L, Mechoulam R, Lederman V, et al. Prospective analysis of safety and efficacy of medical cannabis in large unselected population of patients with cancer. Eur J Intern Med 2018;49:37–43. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Brady KT, McCauley JL, Back SE. Prescription opioid misuse, abuse, and treatment in the United States: an update. Am J Psychiatry 2016;173:18–26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Brooner RK, King VL, Kidorf M, et al. Psychiatric and substance use comorbidity among treatment-seeking opioid abusers. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1997;54:71–80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Buckner JD, Ecker AH, Cohen AS. Mental health problems and interest in marijuana treatment among marijuana-using college students. Addict Behav 2010;35:826–833. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Butler SF, Budman SH, Fernandez KC, et al. Development and validation of the current opioid misuse measure. Pain 2007;130:144–156. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Caputi TL, Humphreys K. Medical marijuana users are more likely to use prescription drugs medically and nonmedically. J Addict Med 2018;12:295–299. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Today’s Heroin Epidemic: More People at Risk, Multiple Drugs Abused (CDC Vital Signs). Center for Disease Control and Prevention. 2015. [Google Scholar]
  9. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Multiple Cause of Death Data on CDC WONDER. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC; 2016. [Google Scholar]
  10. Cerdá M, Wall M, Keyes KM, et al. Medical marijuana laws in 50 states: investigating the relationship between state legalization of medical marijuana and marijuana use, abuse and dependence. Drug Alcohol Depend 2012;120:22–27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Chou R, Fanciullo GJ, Fine PG, et al. , American Pain Society-American Academy of Pain Medicine Opioids Guidelines Panel. Clinical guidelines for the use of chronic opioid therapy in chronic noncancer pain. J Pain 2009;10:113–130. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Chou R, Turner JA, Devine EB, et al. The effectiveness and risks of long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain: a systematic review for a National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop. Ann Intern Med 2015;162:276–286. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Chu LF, Clark DJ, Angst MS. Opioid tolerance and hyperalgesia in chronic pain patients after one month of oral morphine therapy: a preliminary prospective study. J Pain 2006;7:43–48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Daubresse M, Chang H-Y, Yu Y, et al. Ambulatory diagnosis and treatment of nonmalignant pain in the United States, 2000–2010. Medical Care 2013;51:870–878. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Deshpande A, Mailis-Gagnon A, Zoheiry N, et al. Efficacy and adverse effects of medical marijuana for chronic noncancer pain: systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Can Fam Physician 2015;61:e372–e381. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Dowell D, Haegerich TM, Chou R. CDC guideline for prescribing opioids for chronic pain—United States, 2016. JAMA 2016;315:1624–1645. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Edlund MJ, Sullivan M, Steffick D, et al. Do users of regularly prescribed opioids have higher rates of substance use problems than nonusers? Pain Med 2007;8:647–656. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Fiellin LE, Tetrault JM, Becker WC, et al. Previous use of alcohol, cigarettes, and marijuana and subsequent abuse of prescription opioids in young adults. J Adolesc Health 2013;52:158–163. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Gossop M, Darke S, Griffiths P, et al. The Severity of Dependence Scale (SDS): psychometric properties of the SDS in English and Australian samples of heroin, cocaine and amphetamine users. Addiction 1995;90:607–614. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Grant BF, Stinson FS, Dawson DA, et al. Prevalence and co-occurrence of substance use disorders and independent mood and anxiety disorders: results from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2004;61:807–816. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Hawkins JD, Catalano RF, Miller JY. Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: implications for substance abuse prevention. Psychol Bull 1992;112:64–105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Hill KP. Medical marijuana for treatment of chronic pain and other medical and psychiatric problems: a clinical review. JAMA 2015;313:2474–2483. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Hill KP, Palastro MD, Johnson B, et al. Cannabis and pain: a clinical review. Cannabis Cannabinoid Res 2017;2:96–104. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Humeniuk R, Ali R, Babor TF, et al. Validation of the Alcohol, Smoking And Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST). Addiction (Abingdon England) 2008;103:1039–1047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Iraurgi Castillo I, González Saiz F, Lozano Rojas O, et al. Estimation of cutoff for the Severity of Dependence Scale (SDS) for opiate dependence by ROC analysis. Acta Esp Psiquiatr 2010;38:270–277. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Jané-Llopis E, Jané-Llopis E, Matytsina I, et al. Mental health and alcohol, drugs and tobacco: a review of the comorbidity between mental disorders and the use of alcohol, tobacco and illicit drugs. Drug Alcohol Rev 2006;25:515–536. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Jensen B, Chen J, Furnish T, et al. Medical marijuana and chronic pain: a review of basic science and clinical evidence. Curr Pain Headache Rep 2015;19:50. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Kandel DB, Huang F-Y, Davies M. Comorbidity between patterns of substance use dependence and psychiatric syndromes. Drug Alcohol Depend 2001;64:233–241. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Katon W, Lin EH, Kroenke K. The association of depression and anxiety with medical symptom burden in patients with chronic medical illness. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2007;29:147–155. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW. The Patient Health Questionnaire-2: validity of a two-item depression screener. Med Care 2003;41:1284–1292. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW, et al. Anxiety disorders in primary care: prevalence, impairment, comorbidity, and detection. Ann Intern Med 2007;146:317–325. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Leri F, Bruneau J, Stewart J. Understanding polydrug use: review of heroin and cocaine co-use. Addiction 2003;98:7–22. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Löwe B, Kroenke K, Gräfe K. Detecting and monitoring depression with a two-item questionnaire (PHQ-2). J Psychosom Res 2005;58:163–171. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Löwe B, Wahl I, Rose M, et al. A 4-item measure of depression and anxiety: validation and standardization of the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) in the general population. J Affective Disord 2010;122:86–95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Manchikanti L, Cash KA, Damron KS, et al. Controlled substance abuse and illicit drug use in chronic pain patients: an evaluation of multiple variables. Pain Physician 2006;9:215–225. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Martinotti G, Carli V, Tedeschi D, et al. Mono- and polysubstance dependent subjects differ on social factors, childhood trauma, personality, suicidal behaviour, and comorbid Axis I diagnoses. Addict Behav 2009;34:790–793. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. McCarberg BH, Barkin RL. The future of cannabinoids as analgesic agents: a pharmacologic, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic overview. Am J Therap 2007;14:475. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Moss HB, Chen CM, Yi H. Early adolescent patterns of alcohol, cigarettes, and marijuana polysubstance use and young adult substance use outcomes in a nationally representative sample. Drug Alcohol Depend 2014;136:51–62. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Naef M, Curatolo M, Petersen-Felix S, et al. The analgesic effect of oral delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), morphine, and a THC-morphine combination in healthy subjects under experimental pain conditions. Pain 2003;105:79–88. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Nelson LS, Perrone J. Curbing the opioid epidemic in the United States: The Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS). JAMA 2012;308: 457–458. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Pacula RL, Ringel J, Dobkin C, et al. The incremental inpatient costs associated with marijuana comorbidity. Drug Alcohol Depend 2008;92:248–257. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Raft D, Gregg J, Ghia J, et al. Effects of intravenous tetrahydrocannabinol on experimental and surgical pain; psychological correlates of the analgesic response. Clin Pharmacol Therap 1977;21:26–33. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Sherman BJ, McRae-Clark AL. Treatment of cannabis use disorder: current science and future outlook. Pharmacotherapy 2016;36:511–535. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Taylor B, Rehm J. When risk factors combine: the interaction between alcohol and smoking for aerodigestive cancer, coronary heart disease, and traffic and fire injury. Addict Behav 2006;31:1522–1535. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Tompkins DA, Campbell CM. Opioid-induced hyperalgesia: clinically relevant or extraneous research phenomenon? Curr Pain Headache Rep 2011;15:129–136. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Von Korff M, Ormel J, Keefe FJ, et al. Grading the severity of chronic pain. Pain 1992;50:133–149. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Wang H-Y, Friedman E, Olmstead MC, et al. Ultra-low-dose naloxone suppresses opioid tolerance, dependence and associated changes in mu opioid receptor–G protein coupling and G(( signaling. Neuroscience 2005;135:247–261. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Wasan AD, Butler SF, Budman SH, et al. Psychiatric history and psychologic adjustment as risk factors for aberrant drug-related behavior among patients with chronic pain. Clin J Pain 2007;23:307–315. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Weinberger AH, Desai RA, McKee SA. Nicotine withdrawal in U.S. smokers with current mood, anxiety, alcohol use, and substance use disorders. Drug Alcohol Depend 2010;108:7–12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Wilsey BL, Fishman SM, Tsodikov A, et al. Psychological comorbidities predicting prescription opioid abuse among patients in chronic pain presenting to the emergency department. Pain Med 2008;9:1107–1117. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Zvolensky MJ, Mayorga NA, Garey L. Worry, anxiety sensitivity, and electronic cigarettes among adults. Psychiatr Res 2018;269:321–327. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES