Medicinal Use of Different Cannabis Strains: Results from a Large Prospective Survey in Germany.

IF 3.6 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Pharmacopsychiatry Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-12 DOI:10.1055/a-2261-2269
Natalia Szejko, Eva Becher, Florian Heimann, Franjo Grotenhermen, Kirsten R Müller-Vahl
{"title":"Medicinal Use of Different Cannabis Strains: Results from a Large Prospective Survey in Germany.","authors":"Natalia Szejko, Eva Becher, Florian Heimann, Franjo Grotenhermen, Kirsten R Müller-Vahl","doi":"10.1055/a-2261-2269","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Up to now, it is unclear whether different medicinal <i>cannabis</i> (MC) strains are differently efficacious across different medical conditions. In this study, the effectiveness of different MC strains was compared depending on the disease to be treated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was an online survey conducted in Germany between June 2020 and August 2020. Patients were allowed to participate only if they received a <i>cannabis</i>-based treatment from pharmacies in the form of <i>cannabis</i> flowers prescribed by a physician.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey was completed by n=1,028 participants. Most participants (58%) have used MC for more than 1 year, on average, 5.9 different strains. <i>Bedrocan</i> (pure tetrahydrocannabinol to pure cannabidiol [THC:CBD]=22:<1) was the most frequently prescribed strain, followed by <i>Bakerstreet</i> (THC:CBD=19:<1) and <i>Pedanios 22/1</i> (THC:CBD=22:1). The most frequent conditions MC was prescribed for were different pain disorders, psychiatric and neurological diseases, and gastrointestinal symptoms. Overall, the mean patient-reported effectiveness was 80.1% (range, 0-100%). A regression model revealed no association between the patient-reported effectiveness and the variety. Furthermore, no influence of the disease on the choice of the MC strain was detected. On average, 2.1 side effects were reported (most commonly dry mouth (19.5%), increased appetite (17.1%), and tiredness (13.0%)). However, 29% of participants did not report any side effects. Only 398 participants (38.7%) indicated that costs for MC were covered by their health insurance.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients self-reported very good efficacy and tolerability of MC. There was no evidence suggesting that specific MC strains are superior depending on the disease to be treated.</p>","PeriodicalId":19783,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacopsychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11076101/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacopsychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2261-2269","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Up to now, it is unclear whether different medicinal cannabis (MC) strains are differently efficacious across different medical conditions. In this study, the effectiveness of different MC strains was compared depending on the disease to be treated.

Methods: This was an online survey conducted in Germany between June 2020 and August 2020. Patients were allowed to participate only if they received a cannabis-based treatment from pharmacies in the form of cannabis flowers prescribed by a physician.

Results: The survey was completed by n=1,028 participants. Most participants (58%) have used MC for more than 1 year, on average, 5.9 different strains. Bedrocan (pure tetrahydrocannabinol to pure cannabidiol [THC:CBD]=22:<1) was the most frequently prescribed strain, followed by Bakerstreet (THC:CBD=19:<1) and Pedanios 22/1 (THC:CBD=22:1). The most frequent conditions MC was prescribed for were different pain disorders, psychiatric and neurological diseases, and gastrointestinal symptoms. Overall, the mean patient-reported effectiveness was 80.1% (range, 0-100%). A regression model revealed no association between the patient-reported effectiveness and the variety. Furthermore, no influence of the disease on the choice of the MC strain was detected. On average, 2.1 side effects were reported (most commonly dry mouth (19.5%), increased appetite (17.1%), and tiredness (13.0%)). However, 29% of participants did not report any side effects. Only 398 participants (38.7%) indicated that costs for MC were covered by their health insurance.

Conclusions: Patients self-reported very good efficacy and tolerability of MC. There was no evidence suggesting that specific MC strains are superior depending on the disease to be treated.

不同品种大麻的药用情况:德国一项大型前瞻性调查的结果。
背景:到目前为止,还不清楚不同的药用大麻(MC)品种对不同的病症是否有不同的疗效。在这项研究中,根据治疗疾病的不同,比较了不同药用大麻品种的疗效:这是一项于 2020 年 6 月至 2020 年 8 月期间在德国进行的在线调查。患者只有在医生处方的大麻花形式的药房接受过大麻治疗,才可参与调查:共有 1,028 名参与者完成了调查。大多数参与者(58%)使用 MC 超过 1 年,平均使用 5.9 种不同的大麻品种。Bedrocan(纯四氢大麻酚对纯大麻二酚[THC:CBD]=22:Bakerstreet(THC:CBD=19:Pedanios 22/1(THC:CBD=22:1))。MC 最常被处方用于治疗的疾病包括不同的疼痛疾病、精神和神经疾病以及胃肠道症状。总体而言,患者报告的平均有效率为 80.1%(范围为 0-100%)。回归模型显示,患者报告的疗效与疾病种类之间没有关联。此外,也没有发现疾病对选择 MC 菌株有任何影响。参与者平均报告了 2.1 种副作用(最常见的是口干(19.5%)、食欲增加(17.1%)和疲倦(13.0%))。不过,29% 的参与者未报告任何副作用。只有 398 名参与者(38.7%)表示他们的医疗保险支付了 MC 的费用:结论:患者自述MC的疗效和耐受性都非常好。没有证据表明,根据治疗疾病的不同,特定的 MC 菌株具有优越性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pharmacopsychiatry
Pharmacopsychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
9.30%
发文量
54
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Covering advances in the fi eld of psychotropic drugs, Pharmaco psychiatry provides psychiatrists, neuroscientists and clinicians with key clinical insights and describes new avenues of research and treatment. The pharmacological and neurobiological bases of psychiatric disorders are discussed by presenting clinical and experimental research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信