Cannabis flower, concentrates, and edibles: a narrative review comparing prevalence of use, methods of consumption, and cannabis use disorder outcomes.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Atticus Inman, Anita Cservenka
{"title":"Cannabis flower, concentrates, and edibles: a narrative review comparing prevalence of use, methods of consumption, and cannabis use disorder outcomes.","authors":"Atticus Inman, Anita Cservenka","doi":"10.1080/10550887.2024.2418225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cannabis use has increased in prevalence over the past several decades, and novel forms of cannabis (e.g., concentrates and edibles) have become readily available.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this narrative review was to compare the prevalence of use, methods of consumption, and risk for cannabis use disorder outcomes across cannabis forms to better understand the diversifying landscape of cannabis products and practices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The electronic database PubMed was used to find relevant articles with keyword searches related to the prevalence of use, methods of consumption, and risk for cannabis use disorder for three major forms of cannabis (flower, concentrates, and edibles).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Use of all three major forms is prevalent among many cannabis users, but there are differences in user demographics and methods of consumption. Use of cannabis concentrates may be associated with a greater risk for cannabis use disorder. Given the historical predominance of cannabis flower use, many outcomes have not been compared with concentrates or edibles. Furthermore, form-specific longitudinal data is lacking.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Given the more recent emergence of novel cannabis products, comparisons of the long-term outcomes of use for each form are needed to advance the development of more informed harm reduction practices that are common to and specific to each form of cannabis.</p>","PeriodicalId":47493,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Addictive Diseases","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Addictive Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10550887.2024.2418225","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Cannabis use has increased in prevalence over the past several decades, and novel forms of cannabis (e.g., concentrates and edibles) have become readily available.

Objective: The purpose of this narrative review was to compare the prevalence of use, methods of consumption, and risk for cannabis use disorder outcomes across cannabis forms to better understand the diversifying landscape of cannabis products and practices.

Methods: The electronic database PubMed was used to find relevant articles with keyword searches related to the prevalence of use, methods of consumption, and risk for cannabis use disorder for three major forms of cannabis (flower, concentrates, and edibles).

Results: Use of all three major forms is prevalent among many cannabis users, but there are differences in user demographics and methods of consumption. Use of cannabis concentrates may be associated with a greater risk for cannabis use disorder. Given the historical predominance of cannabis flower use, many outcomes have not been compared with concentrates or edibles. Furthermore, form-specific longitudinal data is lacking.

Conclusions: Given the more recent emergence of novel cannabis products, comparisons of the long-term outcomes of use for each form are needed to advance the development of more informed harm reduction practices that are common to and specific to each form of cannabis.

大麻花、浓缩物和配料:比较使用流行率、消费方法和大麻使用障碍结果的叙述性综述。
背景:在过去几十年中,大麻使用的流行率有所上升,新型大麻(如浓缩大麻和食用大麻)也变得很容易获得:本叙述性综述旨在比较不同形式大麻的使用流行率、消费方式和大麻使用障碍的风险,以更好地了解大麻产品和做法的多样化情况:方法:使用电子数据库 PubMed 查找相关文章,搜索关键词涉及三种主要大麻形式(花、浓缩物和食用剂)的使用流行率、消费方式和大麻使用障碍风险:许多大麻使用者普遍使用所有三种主要形式的大麻,但使用者的人口统计学特征和消费方式存在差异。使用大麻浓缩物可能与大麻使用障碍的更大风险有关。鉴于大麻花的使用历来占主导地位,许多结果尚未与浓缩剂或食用剂进行比较。此外,还缺乏特定形式的纵向数据:鉴于最近出现的新型大麻产品,需要对每种形式大麻的长期使用结果进行比较,以推动制定更明智的减少危害做法,这些做法既适用于每种形式的大麻,也适用于每种形式的大麻。
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
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: The Journal of Addictive Diseases is an essential, comprehensive resource covering the full range of addictions for today"s addiction professional. This in-depth, practical journal helps you stay on top of the vital issues and the clinical skills necessary to ensure effective practice. The latest research, treatments, and public policy issues in addiction medicine are presented in a fully integrated, multi-specialty perspective. Top researchers and respected leaders in addiction issues share their knowledge and insights to keep you up-to-date on the most important research and practical applications.
×
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