Article Text

Download PDFPDF

ASRA Pain Medicine consensus guidelines on the management of the perioperative patient on cannabis and cannabinoids: an infographic
  1. Shalini Shah1,
  2. Eric S Schwenk2 and
  3. Samer Narouze3
  1. 1 Anesthesiology and Perioperative Care, University of California Irvine, Orange, California, USA
  2. 2 Anesthesiology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
  3. 3 Center for Pain Medicine, Summa Western Reserve Hospital, Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Eric S Schwenk, Anesthesiology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA; prepdrum{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


The past two decades have seen an exponential increase in the use of cannabis and cannabinoids in the USA, as a result of both regulatory changes and public interest in possible therapeutic benefits. Patients presenting for surgery are using cannabis and cannabinoids with increasing frequency and guidelines on safe perioperative management are needed. The Cannabis Working Group in the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine drafted nine key questions that addressed this topic. A 12-member expert panel consisting of anesthesiologists, pain physicians, and a patient advocate used a modified Delphi method to create responses. Selected recommendations from these guidelines1 are shown in this infographic.

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication



  • Twitter @ShaliniShahMD, @ESchwenkMD, @NarouzeMD

  • Correction notice This article has been corrected since it published Online First. The title has been updated.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles