Adult use of highly-potent Δ9-THC cannabis concentrate products by U.S. state cannabis legalization status, 2021.

Background: Compared to plant/flower cannabis products, cannabis concentrates have higher average potency of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC), which may be associated with greater likelihood of cannabis-related harms. Information on factors associated with use of cannabis concentrates is needed.
Methods: Respondents were 4,328 adult past-7-day cannabis users from all 50 U.S. states and Washington DC (DC) who participated in an online 2021 survey. Using logistic regression to generate adjusted odds ratios (aOR), we investigated whether participants in states that enacted recreational cannabis laws (RCL, 12 states plus DC [treated as a state], n = 1,236) or medical cannabis laws (MCL-only, 23 states, n = 2,030) by December 31, 2020 were more likely than those in states without cannabis laws (no-CL, 15 states, n = 1,062) to use cannabis concentrate products in the prior 7 days.
Results: Most participants (92.4%) used plant material in the prior 7 days; 57.0% used cannabis concentrates. In RCL, MCL and no-CL states, concentrate use was reported by 61.5%, 56.6%, and 52.5%, respectively. Compared to participants in no-CL states, odds of using cannabis concentrate products were greater among those in RCL states (aOR = 1.47; CI = 1.17-1.84) and MCL-only states (aOR = 1.29; CI = 1.08-1.55). Whether states had legally-authorized dispensaries had little effect on results.
Conclusion: Results suggest that individuals in MCL-only and RCL states are more likely to use cannabis concentrate products. Determining mechanisms underlying these results, e.g., commercialization, could provide important information for prevention. Clinicians should be alert to patient use of concentrates, especially in MCL-only and RCL states. Continued monitoring is warranted as additional states legalize cannabis use.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)