Sarah J Weisbeck1, Katherine S Bright1, Carla S Ginn2, Jacqueline M Smith1, K Alix Hayden3, Catherine Ringham4. 1. Faculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, 2500 University Dr. N.W, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada. 2. Faculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, 2500 University Dr. N.W, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada. cginn@ucalgary.ca. 3. Libraries and Cultural Resources, University of Calgary, 2500 University Dr. N.W, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada. 4. Faculty of Nursing, Alberta Health Services, University of Calgary, 2500 University Dr. N.W, Calgary, AB, T3N 1N4, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A rapid review was conducted in order to produce a streamlined and time-limited systematic evidence review to understand women's perceptions, beliefs, and knowledge of the risks associated with cannabis use during pregnancy. METHODS: MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, EMBASE, PsycINFO (OVID interface), and CINAHL (Ebsco interface) databases were searched from inception to March 2019. Qualitative and descriptive studies, and reviews that addressed pregnant women's perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes about personal cannabis use were included. The methodological quality of the included studies was appraised using valid tools and data extraction was guided by suitable checklists. Full text of 18 citations was retrieved and reviewed, and 5 studies met the inclusion criteria. SYNTHESIS: Women who continued to use cannabis during pregnancy often perceived less risk compared with nonusers. Their uncertainty regarding adverse consequences, perceived therapeutic effects, and lack of communication with health care providers contributed to cannabis use. Women perceived this lack of counselling as an indication that outcomes of cannabis use while pregnant were not significant. CONCLUSION: This synthesis highlights important factors in women's decision-making processes regarding use or cessation of cannabis during pregnancy. In addition, the importance of health care providers providing information, education, and appropriate counselling to childbearing women is highlighted as these conversations may influence women's perceptions of risk and help them make informed choices.
OBJECTIVE: A rapid review was conducted in order to produce a streamlined and time-limited systematic evidence review to understand women's perceptions, beliefs, and knowledge of the risks associated with cannabis use during pregnancy. METHODS: MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, EMBASE, PsycINFO (OVID interface), and CINAHL (Ebsco interface) databases were searched from inception to March 2019. Qualitative and descriptive studies, and reviews that addressed pregnant women's perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes about personal cannabis use were included. The methodological quality of the included studies was appraised using valid tools and data extraction was guided by suitable checklists. Full text of 18 citations was retrieved and reviewed, and 5 studies met the inclusion criteria. SYNTHESIS: Women who continued to use cannabis during pregnancy often perceived less risk compared with nonusers. Their uncertainty regarding adverse consequences, perceived therapeutic effects, and lack of communication with health care providers contributed to cannabis use. Women perceived this lack of counselling as an indication that outcomes of cannabis use while pregnant were not significant. CONCLUSION: This synthesis highlights important factors in women's decision-making processes regarding use or cessation of cannabis during pregnancy. In addition, the importance of health care providers providing information, education, and appropriate counselling to childbearing women is highlighted as these conversations may influence women's perceptions of risk and help them make informed choices.
Entities:
Keywords:
Attitude to health; Attitudes; Cannabis; Health knowledge; Perinatal; Pregnancy
Authors: Suman Chandra; Mohamed M Radwan; Chandrani G Majumdar; James C Church; Tom P Freeman; Mahmoud A ElSohly Journal: Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2019-01-22 Impact factor: 5.270