This study highlights the intricate interplay between evidence, education, and social perceptions in advancing medical cannabis as a therapeutic option. While there is a shared recognition of its potential benefits, the insights provided by medical doctors and pharmacists underscore the nuanced challenges that must be addressed for its responsible acceptance in clinical practice.

The findings of this study align with existing literature on the polarized perspectives surrounding medical cannabis. Physicians’ skepticism regarding medical cannabis is well-documented in the literature particularly in the context of its severe adverse effects, potential misuse, the high placebo response, and positive media attention in cannabis trials [14,15]. A study focusing on New Zealand physicians identified limited clinical evidence as the principal barrier to prescribing medicinal cannabis [16]. Additional concerns included a perceived lack of knowledge about medicinal cannabis, apprehensions over professional reputation, social stigma, and the cost of products [16]. Similarly, Hachem et al. [17] indicate that healthcare practitioners often feel unprepared to prescribe medical cannabis due to insufficient clinical research and uncertainties about safe and effective administration. The study suggests that this reluctance is compounded by a lack of formal education on cannabis in medical curricula, leading to hesitancy in engaging with cannabis-based treatments [17].

Pharmacists also exhibited diverse perspectives on medical cannabis, reflecting their critical role as intermediaries between patients and prescribers, aligning with previous research. A recent literature review found that while pharmacists are generally comfortable dispensing medical cannabis, they express a need for further education to ensure safe and effective patient care [18]. In addition, pharmacists are frequently at the forefront of patient education on cannabis. Dattani and Mohr [19] indicated that pharmacists play a pivotal role in counseling patients about dosing, potential drug interactions, and the safe use of cannabis products, thereby enhancing patient acceptance and adherence to cannabis-based treatments.

One of the most pressing concerns among participants was the lack of robust, disease-specific evidence to guide medical cannabis acceptance in clinical practice. Our study’s emphasis on addressing evidence gaps aligns with existing literature that cites the scarcity of high-quality clinical trials as a limiting factor. A recent systematic review emphasizes that reliable evidence is limited, particularly concerning cannabidiol (CBD), with only 6.7% of CBD trials meeting high-quality standards [20]. The review underscores the necessity for more rigorous studies to establish clear clinical guidelines for medical cannabis use. Similarly, Simei et al. [21] discuss the challenges in developing cannabinoid-based drugs, noting that the global interest in therapeutic uses of CBD is outpacing the scientific evidence supporting its safety and efficacy. They call for more basic and clinical research adhering to regulatory guidelines to obtain approval for broader clinical indications. Finally, Senator et al. [22] analyzed 23 contemporary systematic reviews on the effectiveness and safety of medical cannabis. They found that the existing body of work often lacks the methodological rigor necessary to draw definitive conclusions, highlighting the need for more targeted and high-quality clinical trials.

Additionally, the emphasis on collaborative research aligns with the growing recognition that interdisciplinary efforts are necessary to address the complexities of medical cannabis, including its pharmacodynamics and potential interactions with existing medications [23]. This underscores the importance of partnerships between academia, industry, and policymakers, which can expedite the generation of reliable data and foster trust among stakeholders.

Social stigma emerged as a significant barrier to the broader acceptance of medical cannabis. Many participants emphasized the need for targeted educational initiatives aimed at normalizing cannabis use in medical contexts. The role of education in combating stigma and enhancing healthcare provider confidence is similarly reflected in prior studies. Literature consistently advocates for targeted educational interventions to bridge knowledge gaps and address misconceptions, which our study also identified as critical. Kruger et al. [24] highlight that many healthcare providers report low levels of knowledge about medical cannabis, which can hinder patient-provider discussions. They emphasize the importance of comprehensive education and training for healthcare professionals to facilitate open and informed conversations with patients regarding medical cannabis use. Additionally, Schuhmacher et al. [25] suggest that healthcare providers have significant knowledge gaps in authorizing medical cannabis, which limited their practice competence and confidence in this area. They recommend developing practice guidelines and educational resources to support primary care providers in medical cannabis authorization within the healthcare system. Both studies underscore the need for enhanced training and education among healthcare providers to normalize and improve discussions about medical cannabis with patients, echoing the perspectives of participants in our study.

Regulatory challenges emerged as a significant barrier to medical cannabis adoption. Our study’s findings on the fragmented nature of regulations and the need for harmonized policies are consistent with calls for global and national frameworks that establish clear guidelines for prescribing and dispensing. Mead [26] discusses the complex legal and regulatory frameworks surrounding cannabis in the United States, highlighting the challenges posed by inconsistent regulations at both federal and state levels. The study emphasizes the necessity for a cohesive regulatory approach to facilitate medical cannabis adoption. In addition, de Souza et al. [27] provide an overview of various regulatory frameworks for medical cannabis worldwide, focusing on the Brazilian scenario. The study highlights the disparities in regulations and advocates for harmonized policies to ensure safe and effective access to medical cannabis.

Moreover, a structured regulatory framework for medical cannabis could enhance its acceptance among healthcare professionals by providing clear guidelines and quality control measures. A scoping review identified that the need for more knowledge, advice, and empirical/clinical evidence is a significant facilitator in the implementation of medical cannabis regulations [4]. Countries with well-defined medical cannabis regulations have seen higher acceptance rates among physicians and pharmacists. For instance, Germany’s accommodative framework allows patients to access cannabis through established programs, contributing to the greater inclusion of medical cannabis in clinical practice [28]. These examples illustrate that comprehensive regulatory frameworks could bridge the gap between medical acceptance and patient demand for cannabis-based treatments.

Finally, our study highlights the importance of communication strategies that focus on safety, efficacy, and transparency in increasing the legitimacy of medical cannabis. A recent study analyzing Instagram posts related to cannabinoid use found that educational content emphasizing safety and efficacy garnered significant engagement, indicating public interest in transparent information about medical cannabis [29]. Our study’s participants recommended communication initiatives that clearly distinguish medical cannabis from its recreational counterpart. Similarly, Cheng et al. [30] indicated that healthcare professionals support the use of medical cannabis for chronic pain management but emphasize the need for clear guidelines and education to differentiate its medical applications from recreational use. Additionally, our study’s participants supported using testimonials from patients and healthcare providers to humanize medical cannabis and highlight its real-world benefits. A systematic review found that physicians experienced in prescribing medical cannabis were more convinced of its benefits and less concerned about adverse effects than non-experienced physicians, suggesting that sharing their positive experiences could enhance acceptance [31].

This research is subject to some limitations. First, the use of a non-random sampling method may limit the generalizability of the findings, as participants were purposively selected based on their professional experience with medical cannabis. Therefore, their responses are unlikely to be representative of physicians in general, as the participants are likely much more knowledgeable about and open to the medical use of cannabis than the broader physician population. Second, while the sample size was relatively small, practical research suggests that a sample of 12 participants may be sufficient to reach data saturation within a relatively homogeneous population [32]. However, a larger sample could have provided additional nuances. Finally, the study focused exclusively on the perspectives of medical doctors and pharmacists, excluding other key stakeholders such as patients, policymakers, and representatives from the pharmaceutical industry. Including these perspectives could have further enriched our findings and provided a more comprehensive understanding of the challenges and opportunities surrounding medical cannabis acceptance in clinical practice.