Impact of Medical Cannabis on Recovery from Playing-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders in Musicians: An Observational Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Playing-related musculoskeletal disorders (PRMDs) are musculoskeletal symptoms that interfere with the ability to play at the level a musician is accustomed to. Musicians have an 84% lifetime prevalence of PRMD. Many types of analgesia are inappropriate for this population due to their risks, but cannabidiol (CBD) has been shown to have anti-inflammatory properties and can reduce the perception of pain. Medical cannabis has also been shown to be safer than other analgesia in terms of serious adverse events. This study explores the impact of medical cannabis for PRMD on perceptions of pain and mental health outcomes. Methods: Participants (n = 204) completed questionnaires at baseline and six months: the Musculoskeletal Pain Intensity and Interference Questionnaire for Musicians (MPIIQM) and Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). Participants self-selected their group: non-cannabis users (n = 42), new medical cannabis users (n = 61), and long-term medical cannabis users (n = 101). Data were analyzed using paired t-tests for within-group and ANOVA for between-group differences. Results: At six months, there was no difference (p = 0.579) in cannabidiol dose between new (24.87 ± 12.86 mg) and long-term users (21.48 ± 12.50 mg). There was a difference in tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) dose (p = 0.003) between new (3.74 ± 4.22 mg) and long-term users (4.41 ± 5.18 mg). At six months, new cannabis users had a significant reduction in pain intensity as measured by The Musculoskeletal Pain Intensity and Interference Questionnaire for Musicians (MPIIQM40) (p = 0.002). Non-users (p = 0.035), new users (p = 0.002), and long-term cannabis users (p = 0.009) all had significant reductions in pain interference (MPIIQM50) at six months. At six months, non-cannabis (p = 0.022) and long-term cannabis users (p = 0.001) had an improvement in DASS-21. The change in pain intensity was the only difference between groups, F(2, 201) = 3.845, p = 0.023. This difference was between long-term (0.83 ± 0.79) and new users (−2.61 ± 7.15). No serious adverse events occurred, and a minority experienced tiredness, cough, and dry mouth. Discussion/Conclusions: This practice-based evidence demonstrated that the multidimensional approach to care provided by the Musicians’ Clinics of Canada benefited all groups at six months. Medical cannabis significantly reduced pain intensity in new users of medical cannabis with PRMD, and all groups saw improvements in pain interference. In keeping with prior studies, medical cannabis seems to be effective at reducing perceptions of pain, including for PRMD. CBD/THC dosing was within guideline recommendations, and no patients experienced any serious adverse events. Limitations include multiple factors impacting patients’ decisions to opt in or out of medical cannabis. These include cost, comorbidities, and disease chronicity. In conclusion, medical cannabis reduces pain intensity in new users, and when combined with a multidimensional approach to care, patients with PRMD can see improvements in pain as well as mental wellbeing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".