Effect of occipitoatlantal decompression on cerebral blood flow dynamics as evaluated by Doppler ultrasonography

Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine and Disorders: An Overview of Peer-Reviewed Publications 2018-2022

Context Osteopathic manipulative medicine (OMM) has been claimed to be effective in various human disorders and conditions. There have been many anecdotal claims to lend credence to the efficacy of this treatment modality. Recently, much work has been done in evidence-based, government-funded projects, and clinical trials in OMM research, and these studies have further demonstrated the efficacy of OMM as direct, integrated, or complementary mechanisms in treating various conditions. Objectives As the field of OMM research has grown significantly in the past few years, we set out to analyze the peer-reviewed publications on OMM in human disorders between January 2018 and December 2022. Methods We used keywords and terms which included "osteopath," "osteopathic," osteopathic manipulative medicine," "osteopathic manipulative treatment," and "disorder," to systematically sample two public databases, PubMed and Science Direct. After the first query was recorded, we then applied more specific and stringent criteria to identify publications that (a) were written in English, (b) contained at least one human disorder/condition treated by OMM, (c) were co-authored by at least one osteopathic physician-scientist, and (d) contained at least one OMM technique. Results Our initial sampling of databases resulted in 404 publications. After applying our screening criteria, we identified and analyzed 249 (62%; 249/404) qualified publications in "OMM and Human Disorders" We then categorized them into (a) types of publications, (b) country origins of corresponding author(s), (c) groups of disorder and condition, (d) classification of the OMM used, and (e) relating the treated conditions with the five models of OMM. We found that in the 249 publications, 158 (63%) are research articles, 66 (27%) review papers, and 25 (10%) case reports. In addition, nine countries, the United States, Italy, Brazil, Spain, France, Germany, Canada, the United Kingdom (UK), and Australia contributed most of the publications of OMM. VOSviewer analysis identified a wide range of human disorders that were effectively treated with OMM. These included musculoskeletal, low back pain, neurological, headache, inflammation (including autoimmune conditions, COVID-19, lymphatic drainage), neonate/preterm infant disorders, anxiety, and dizziness. Conclusions Our comprehensive analysis showed that there has been a significant increase in peer-reviewed OMM publications in recent years, led by the United States osteopathic physician-scientists and European osteopathic scientists. OMM was found effective in treating not only common conditions such as pneumonia, low back pain, and musculoskeletal disorders, but also disorders such as inflammation, dizziness, headache, anxiety, and neonate/preterm infant disorders.

Meta-epidemiologic review: blinding and sham treatment in clinical trial design for osteopathic manipulative treatment research

Objective

To analyze the consistency of study designs in osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) research, focusing on blinding protocols and the use of sham treatments.

Data Source and Study Selection

PubMed and CINAHL were searched in January 2022. A total of 83 research studies between 2009 and 2021 were selected based on the presence of a double- or single-blind study design and/or sham treatment.

Data Extraction and Analysis

Data regarding the primary outcome measures, blinding design, measures used to determine success of blinding, osteopathic technique used, and sham technique used for each eligible study were extracted and compared among different study designs.

Results

A total of 5968 subjects participated in the 83 trials. The study population mainly consisted of asymptomatic individuals (25%) and chronic back pain patients (19%). Light touch was employed most commonly (49%) as the sham treatment, followed by unrelated sham (20%) and incomplete maneuvers (20%). Most studies blinded the subjects (80%) or the outcome evaluator/data analyzer (71%), while only 20% studies blinded the osteopathic physicians.

Conclusions

Strict double-blinding is achievable for OMT clinical research by blinding the subjects and data collectors/analyzers rather than the osteopaths providing the actual treatment. The use of questionnaires to determine the success of blinding should be considered. Additionally, including OMT-naïve subjects is preferred to enhance blinding success. When designing a sham treatment, careful consideration should be given to blinding the data collector, accounting for the placebo effect, and incorporating an additional no-treatment control group to improve the rigor of the study design.

Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment and the Management of Headaches: A Scoping Review

Headaches have been studied and treated since nearly 7,000 BC because of their significant global impact. Current headache treatment modalities are various and have a wide variety of targets, but medications are the most common. Since conventional medical treatments have several side effects, alternative remedies such as osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) should be considered. OMT can assist in the management of various health conditions, such as low back pain, neck pain, and headaches. The purpose of this scoping review is to evaluate recent findings regarding the efficacy of OMT modalities in the management of headaches such as tension-type headaches (TTH) and migraines. This study was designed as a scoping review to gather evidence on the efficacy of OMT modalities in the management of headaches. Following PRISMA guidelines, four databases were used to search for articles published between 2010 and 2022 that reported the use of OMT and manual therapy for TTH and migraines. Databases used include Embase, PubMed, Medline, and Web of Science. The following keywords were used: treatment, therapy, Headache, migraine, craniosacral, muscle energy, myofascial release, trigger point, osteopathic, and manipulation. The initial search yielded 473 unique articles after removing duplicates. After screening based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and after further analysis, 15 articles were selected. Data reports of OMT and manual therapy efficacy and/or effectiveness in treating TTH and migraine were analyzed. Articles included were randomized control studies (13 of 15, 86.6%), one pilot study (one of 15, 6.7%), and one case series (one of 15, 6.7%), which were divided into TTH (nine of 15, 60%) and Migraine Headaches (six of 15, 40%). All articles reported significant headache improvement in at least one measurement. Of all treatments analyzed, single technique interventions (seven of 15, 47%) and multiple technique interventions (eight of 15, 53%) were identified. Among the techniques used, Myofascial Release was the most common (nine of 15, 60%). The articles presented provide evidence of the significant benefits of manual therapy. Because of the limitations of traditional medicine, OMT can be used either as an alternative or adjuvant therapy for headaches. Evidence suggests the positive impact it can provide on headache management, but the number of randomized control trials and population samples should be increased to support its recommendation. This demonstrates how different osteopathic techniques can provide therapeutic effects on TTH, MH, and potentially other types of headaches. A preference for myofascial release was observed, which can be due to the fast relief from the physiologic effect on tissue movement. This review study demonstrates the benefits OMT has on decreasing headache frequency, intensity, and duration in TTH and migraines. OMT has shown to be beneficial, especially for patients seeking alternative non-pharmaceutical and non-invasive treatments. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effects of different OMT techniques, and different combinations of treatments, on other types of headaches.