This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the
To examine whether timing of
The two study groups were marijuana users (
After control for significant confounders, regression results indicated significant (
Timing of marijuana exposure appears to play a key role in specific fetal growth deficits, with exposure throughout gestation most detrimental. However even first trimester exposure may result in decreased weight. Timing and amount of use could be confounded in this study as those who quit early in pregnancy may have been lighter users than those who continued throughout pregnancy. More research is clearly needed to better understand the role of amount and timing of
香京julia种子在线播放
Although it is widely known in the medical community to discourage the use of marijuana during pregnancy, the exact effects of marijuana on the developing fetus are unclear. Previous studies have found
In addition to the consideration of confounding, few studies have investigated the influence that timing of marijuana use during gestation could have on the results (
Study participants were drawn from women receiving prenatal care at an academic obstetric practice that included patients from both the immediate urban area and the larger surrounding rural region. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the affiliated hospital. Patients were initially eligible for study inclusion if they had a singleton pregnancy, were at least 17 years of age, and delivered during the five-year study window (2016–2020). Patients meeting these criteria were identified
As the current study focused on prenatal marijuana exposure, of relevance to this investigation were the Marijuana Only exposure group, and the Control Group. Participants were classified into the Marijuana Only group if they self-reported marijuana use or had at least one laboratory test positive for marijuana. Laboratory testing was ordered as clinically indicated and for most women in the sample included at least one urine drug screen at entry to prenatal care and another urine drug screen at delivery. The majority of the sample had additional urine drug screens performed during pregnancy (82%), had a urine drug screen performed on their newborn after delivery (90%), or had newborn cord blood testing results available (78%). Other than a positive indicator for marijuana, women in the Marijuana Only group had no additional indications for substance use: they denied tobacco, electronic cigarette, alcohol, and all other illicit drug use during pregnancy, and all laboratory testing was negative for all substances other than marijuana. Additionally, study participants did not have any prescriptions for opioids, benzodiazepines, or barbiturates during pregnancy. The Control Group met al.l these criteria as well, in addition to having no positive indicator for marijuana use. A total of 109 women met the criteria and were classified as Marijuana Only. A total of 171 women met the criteria and were classified into the Control Group.
Following group assignment, electronic medical records were manually reviewed, with all study data abstracted onto study data collection sheets. Abstractions were performed by three of the medical student study investigators, with regular team discussions and oversight by the senior investigator to ensure data collection fidelity. Study data were entered into an electronic spreadsheet by the study coordinator, assisted by a trained undergraduate student and the medical student study investigators, with frequent checks for entry accuracy.
The primary predictor was drug exposure status, grouped as Marijuana Only or Control as described above. Of particular interest was timing of marijuana exposure, with the Marijuana Only group further subdivided into those who used marijuana only prior to 14 weeks' gestation, those who used marijuana only prior to 26 weeks' gestation, and those who continued to use marijuana after that point, based on self-report and urine drug screen results at different points during gestation. Primary outcomes were three birth size parameters: weight in grams, length in centimeters, and head circumference in centimeters.
Additional data were collected to construct variables to describe the study sample and control for confounding. These included several maternal background factors: age, race/ethnicity (coded as White non-Hispanic, African American, Hispanic, and Other), marital status (coded as married vs. single), highest level of education (collected as number of years and analyzed as high school graduate or less vs. any level of post-secondary education), and medical insurance (coded as Medicaid/none vs. private). Maternal medical factors collected included parity, pre-pregnancy BMI (calculated and analyzed as a continuous variable), pregnancy weight gain in pounds, gestational age in weeks/days at first prenatal medical visit, diagnosis of existing or gestational diabetes, diagnosis of hypertension (chronic or pregnancy induced), gestational age at birth in weeks/days, and infant sex.
Because the study sample was intended to include all eligible marijuana users,
Chi-square analyses and t-tests were used to examine the association between group membership (Marijuana Only vs. Control) and maternal background and medical factors. Differences on the three fetal growth parameters between Control participants, those who used Marijuana Only prior to 16 weeks, and those who continued to use Marijuana Only after 16 weeks on the three continuous birth outcomes, were examined using separate linear regression analyses. All background factors significantly associated with group membership at
Background characteristics of the study participants by marijuana use status are presented in
Participant characteristics by marijuana exposure status.
Unexposed Controls ( |
Marijuana Exposed ( |
t/ |
||
---|---|---|---|---|
Mother's age (years) | 25.4 (4.8) | 22.7 (3.6) | 5.06 | <.001 |
Mother's race (% white non-Hispanic) | 41.5% | 34.9% | 2.87 | .163 |
Mother's marital status (% single) | 67.1% | 91.7% | 22.55 | <.001 |
Mother's highest level of education (% H.S. graduate or less) | 47.4% | 72.6% | 13.43 | <.001 |
Mother's medical insurance (% Medicaid or none) | 68.4% | 88.1% | 14.12 | <.001 |
Parity | 1.1 (1.2) | 1.1 (1.2) | .15 | .883 |
Pre-pregnancy BMI | 28.4 (7.1) | 28.6 (7.3) | .16 | .875 |
Pregnancy weight gain (lb) | 23.1 (12.0) | 28.9 (15.1) | 3.53 | <.001 |
Gestational age at first prenatal visit | 14.6 (4.0) | 14.3 (3.9) | .69 | .492 |
Gestational diabetes (%) | 11.1% | 5.5% | 2.57 | .109 |
Pregnancy induced hypertension (%) | 9.9% | 5.6% | 1.68 | .194 |
Gestational age at delivery (wk) | 38.6 (2.2) | 38.9 (2.5) | 1.16 | .248 |
Gender (% male) | 53.8% | 44.0% | .16 | .690 |
Regression results predicting birth size from timing of marijuana exposure.
Outcome predictors | Adjusted mean difference ± standard error | t | |
---|---|---|---|
Weight (gm) | |||
Marijuana 1st trimester only | −154.0 +/− 75.4 | 2.04 | .043 |
Marijuana 1st and 2nd trimester only | −164.1 +/− 104.3 | 1.57 | .117 |
Marijuana throughout gestation | −185.1 +/− 68.1 | 2.72 | .007 |
Length (cm) | |||
Marijuana 1st trimester only | −.27 +/−.45 | .60 | .557 |
Marijuana 1st and 2nd trimester only | −.61 +/−.38 | 1.61 | .109 |
Marijuana throughout gestation | −.94 +/−.57 | 1.65 | .101 |
Head circumference (cm) | |||
Marijuana 1st trimester only | −.47 +/−.27 | 1.73 | .086 |
Marijuana 1st and 2nd trimester only | −.83 +/−.41 | 2.01 | .046 |
Marijuana throughout gestation | −.79 +/−.32 | 2.47 | .014 |
All potentially significant factors (
The results of this study support the hypothesis that marijuana use throughout pregnancy, compared to use only early in pregnancy, has the greatest impact on fetal growth, with both newborn weight and head circumference impacted. However, size parameters may be differentially impacted as weight appears to be reduced somewhat by marijuana exposure even if it only occurs early in gestation, while reduced head circumference was predicted only when exposure continued through the second trimester. Most fetal weight gain and growth occurs in the third trimester with an estimated fetal weight velocity accelerating throughout pregnancy and peaking at 35 weeks of gestation (
Our findings are consistent with previous research that found significant differences in birth weight and head circumference, but not birth length, based on marijuana use in pregnancy (
Low birth weight and decreased head circumference are associated with neurological and psychological issues, health complications in childhood, and the development of various non-communicable diseases in adulthood (
Our study had several strengths. We were able to expand upon previous research by including timing of marijuana use during pregnancy when examining specific fetal outcomes. Additionally, given the known high rates of denial of substance use during pregnancy, we required self-report and biochemical confirmation of no use for our control group. We also eliminated alcohol and other drug use, including tobacco use, as possible factors for differences between groups.
One limitation of this study was the relatively limited sample size, which was a function of both our single site study and participant characteristics that led to study exclusion, especially polysubstance use among participants and limited routine biological testing. A further limitation was the possibility of missing a drug exposure following patient denial and the limited detection window for urine drug screens. Additionally, there is always the potential for human error, both on the provider end during charting and the researcher end during retrospective chart review and data input. Accuracy was ensured by multiple individuals throughout the process to minimize these errors. Finally, while data were derived from a large academic obstetric practice in the Midwestern U.S., generalizability of the findings is limited without further involvement of more heterogeneous participants.
While this study established significant findings of marijuana's effects on certain growth parameters based on timing of use, we did not have a method to compare the total amount of substance being consumed. Thus there was likely variability in regularity of use and the potency or amount of intake with each use among the study participants. These findings would be difficult to establish using retrospective chart review of routine obstetric visits. However, future prospective studies could produce more specific reports of drug use from participants to explore how total amount and even potency of marijuana use may impact fetal growth parameters.
In conclusion, marijuana use throughout gestation predicted significant deficits in birth weight and head circumference at delivery. Marijuana use during the first trimester resulted in significant deficits in newborn weight, with downward trends that were not statistically significant for other growth parameters. Marijuana use throughout the second trimester also had downward trends for all parameters, with a statistically significant impact on head circumference. While there were no statistically significant effects on birth length, downward trends related to ongoing marijuana exposure may suggest findings that are meaningful clinically. Healthcare providers should be aware of these implications of marijuana use in pregnancy, taking notice of the greater effects due to use later in gestation. It is important to encourage patients to stop using marijuana as soon as they become pregnant to reduce fetal growth risks and potential long term adverse health and developmental outcomes in offspring. These findings may also be used to influence commercial practices at cannabis dispensaries where marijuana use during pregnancy has not always been discouraged (
The datasets presented in this article are not readily available because the datasets generated and analyzed for this study are the property of CMU Medical Education Partners and Covenant Health System, not the study authors. As such, data are not publicly available, and any request for access would need to be made to and approved by both CMU Medical Education Partners and Covenant Health System. Requests to access the datasets should be directed to
The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Covenant Health System IRB. Written informed consent for participation was not required for this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.
PD—Conceptualization; Data curation; Investigation; Validation; Writing original draft, Writing review and editing. KN—Data curation; Investigation; Validation; Writing-review and editing. HK—Data curation; Investigation; Validation; Writing-review and editing. KF—Data management. VZ—Data management. BB—Data analysis; Project Administration; Supervision; Writing review and editing. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Central Michigan University College of Medicine student authors received stipend support for their work as a Central Michigan University College of Medicine Summer Research Scholar.
The authors would like to thank CMU College of Medicine and CMU Medical Education Partners. The authors also acknowledge support of Covenant Health System.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.