The Role of Osteopathic Care in Gynaecology and Obstetrics: An Updated Systematic Review

Background: Many efforts are made to find safer and more feasible therapeutic strategies to improve gynaecological care. Non-pharmacological treatments, such as osteopathic interventions, could be used as complementary strategies to better manage different gynaecological conditions. This review aims to report the effectiveness of osteopathic treatment in the gynaecology and obstetrics field, updating the previous review published in 2016. The secondary aim was to elucidate the role of somatic dysfunction (SD) in osteopathic assessment and treatment procedures, as well as their health and economic implications. Methods: An electronic search was conducted in the following databases: Embase, MEDLINE (PubMed), and Science direct. All types of clinical studies published between May 2014 and December 2021 have been included: randomised controlled trial (RCT), controlled before/after, interrupted time series quasi RCT, case controls, case reports, case series, observational, clinical studies involving any type of osteopathic treatment, (standardised, semi-standardised or patients’ need-based treatment) performed alone or in combination with other treatments, were included). Results: A total of 76,750 were identified through database searching and other sources. After the removal of duplicates, 47,655 papers were screened based on title and abstract. A total of 131 full-text articles were consequently assessed for eligibility. Twenty-one new articles were included in the synthesis. A total of 2632 participants with a mean age of 28.9 ± 10.5 years were included in the review. Conclusions: Results showed an effectiveness of osteopathic care in gynaecology and obstetrics, but the studies were too heterogeneous to perform quantitative analysis and make clinical recommendations. Nevertheless, osteopathic care could be considered a safe complementary approach to traditional gynaecological care.

Osteopathic approach to sacroiliac joint pain in pregnant patients

This paper aims to provide a comprehensive review of the management of sacroiliac (SI) joint pain in pregnant patients. Although SI joint pain is highly prevalent among pregnant patients, the unique anatomy of the joint is rarely discussed in a clinical setting. This paper provides comprehensive review of the epidemiology, anatomy, alarm findings, standard treatment, osteopathic assessment, and osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) of the SI joint, and it provides a general and in-depth understanding of the SI joint pain in pregnant patients and its management.

Six Weeks Effects of Dynamic Neuromuscular Stabilization (DNS) Training in Obese Postpartum Women With Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The worldwide prevalence of obesity and low back pain (LBP) has recently dramatically increased and is mainly indicated among postpartum women, leading to a range of adverse health consequences.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the effects of 6 weeks of Dynamic Neuromuscular Stabilization training (DNS) in obese postpartum women with LBP.

METHOD

This was a pretest-posttest study design. The study was conducted with 40 obese postpartum women with LBP randomized to receive DNS (n = 20) or General Exercise (GE, n = 20) 6 times a week for 6 weeks. The data were gathered before and after the 6-week intervention.

RESULTS

Forty participants completed the study (mean ± SD, age 29.30 ± 3.77 years; weight 88.10 ± 6.09 kg; height 165.40 ± 6.31 cm; and BMI, 32.19 ± 1.07 kg/m²). The overall group-by-time interaction was significant for Numeric Pain-Rating Scale, Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire, Inspiration and Expiration Breath Hold Time, and Respiratory Rate outcomes. The global rating of change was significantly different between groups (p < .05). The rate of improvement was higher in the DNS group compared to the GE group in all 6 tests.

CONCLUSION

The present study confirms that DNS is applicable in obese postpartum women with LBP and effectively improved NPRS, MODQ, FABQ, BHT, and RR. It is clinically suggested that DNS is imperative based on ideal ontogenetic patterns to attain optimal results for obese postpartum women with LBP.

The impact of a sacroiliac joint belt on function and pain using the active straight leg raise in pregnancy-related pelvic girdle pain

INTRODUCTION

Pelvic girdle pain (PGP) is the most common musculoskeletal concern in pregnancy. The Active Straight Leg Raise (ASLR) test is diagnostic. Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) belts are included in multimodal therapy, but there is no established predictive measure to determine which pregnant women will benefit.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if the ASLR score is immediately reduced by SIJ belt application and whether PGP pain and function improves after 4 weeks of belt use.

DESIGN

Prospective observational cohort study.

SETTING

Academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

Pregnant women at least 18 years of age in the second or third trimester of pregnancy with posterior PGP and ASLR score of 2 to 10.

INTERVENTIONS

Four-week SIJ belt use.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

ASLR, Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Pelvic Girdle Questionnaire (PGQ), Perceived Global Impression of Improvement (PGII).

RESULTS

Sixty-three women enrolled. On multivariable analysis, immediate belted ASLR score was -2.70 points lower than the non-belted ASLR score (P < .001). Four weeks later there was significant improvement in the ASLR score with a belt (M_diff  = -0.99; P = .001) and without a belt (M_diff  = -1.94; P < .001); the decline was more precipitous for the non-belted response (M_diff  = -0.96; P = .02). Current NRS pain scores declined from baseline by approximately -0.94 points (P < .001). This decline did not depend on ASLR scores (interaction P = .43) or wearing a belt at the time of testing (interaction P = .51). Similar conclusions held for participants' usual NRS score and average PGQ score. After 4 weeks, 82% reported improvement based on the PGII.

CONCLUSIONS

SIJ belts are a safe, well-tolerated, and effective therapeutic option for pregnancy-related PGP. The ASLR score is immediately reduced following SIJ belt application but does not predict pain score 4 weeks later. SIJ belt leads to significant improvements in pain and function over time.

Support for osteopathic manipulative treatment inclusion in chronic pain management guidelines: a narrative review

Context

Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is used to treat chronic pain conditions. However, few guidelines focusing on chronic pain management include recommendations for OMT.

Objectives

To evaluate previous literature on the use of OMT for improving chronic pain.

Methods

A literature search was conducted on MEDLINE/PubMed and ScienceDirect on August 26-27, 2019, using the terms "osteopathic," "chronic," and "pain," yielding a total of 312 MEDLINE/PubMed articles and 515 ScienceDirect articles. Eligibility criteria required that studies investigate pain, functional status, or medication usage through an experimental design, focusing on human subjects with chronic pain who had various forms of OMT administered by osteopathically trained individuals in which the comparator group received no intervention, a sham or placebo, or conventional care. Three authors independently performed literature searches and methodically settled disagreements over article selection.

Results

In the 22 articles included in our study that examined OMT use in chronic pain conditions, we evaluated primary outcomes of pain (22; 100%) and functional status (20; 90.9%), and the secondary outcome of medication usage (3; 13.6%). The majority of articles showed that OMT resulted in a significant decrease in pain levels as compared to baseline pain levels or the control group (20; 90.9%) and that OMT resulted in an improvement in functional status (17; 77.3%). In articles that did not find a significant difference in pain (2; 9.1%) or functional status (3; 13.6%), there were overall outcomes improvements noted. All articles that investigated medication usage (3; 13.6%) showed that OMT was effective in decreasing patients' medication usage. Our study was limited by its small sample size and multimodal comparator group exclusion.

Conclusions

OMT provides an evidence-based management option to reduce pain levels, improve functional status, and decrease medication usage in chronic pain conditions, especially low back pain (LBP). Pain management guidelines should include OMT as a resource to alleviate chronic pain.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Conservative Care for Pregnancy-Related Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

More than one-half of pregnant women experience pregnancy-related low back pain (LBP). Pregnancy-related LBP greatly affects activities of daily life, and although many interventions have been proposed, the optimal treatment for pregnancy-related LBP remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare conservative care strategies on their efficacy and safety for women with pregnancy-related LBP through systematic review with pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, AMED, CINAHL, PEDro, PsycINFO, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to November 2019. Randomized controlled trials and observational controlled studies were included without restriction to language, sample size, or duration of follow-up. Two independent investigators extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias. The quality of evidence was evaluated through Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were included in the qualitative synthesis (18 randomized controlled trials were included in the network meta-analysis). For women with LBP during pregnancy, progressive muscle relaxation therapy (mean difference = -3.96; 95% CI = -7.19 to -0.74; moderate-quality evidence) and Kinesio Taping (mean difference = -3.71; 95% CI = -6.55 to -0.87; low-quality evidence) reduced pain intensity (Visual Analog Scale, range = 0 to 10) compared with placebo. Moderate-quality evidence suggested that transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation improved physical function (mean difference = -6.33; 95% CI = -10.61 to -2.05; Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, range = 0-24) compared with placebo.

CONCLUSION

For patients with LBP during pregnancy, progressive muscle relaxation therapy and Kinesio Taping may help to decrease pain, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation may improve physical function.

IMPACT

This review helps fill the gap in evidence regarding optimal treatment for pregnancy-related LBP.

LAY SUMMARY

If you have LBP during pregnancy, your physical therapist has evidence to support the use of progressive muscle relaxation therapy and Kinesio Taping to help decrease pain and the use of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation to help improve physical function.

Characterizing the use of osteopathic manipulative medicine in the obstetric population by trimester and indications for use

Context

Osteopathic manipulative medicine (OMM) has been shown to successfully alleviate some pregnancy-related pain. However, most of the published data focuses on the third trimester and postpartum period or musculoskeletal indications.

Objective

To explore OMM use among obstetrical providers and determine the frequency of use by trimester and by clinical indications across multiple types of women's healthcare practices in Southern and Central Maine.

Methods

An anonymous, 43-item survey, presented in English, was emailed to 172 eligible providers (physicians, nurse practitioners, and certified nurse midwives with obstetrics privileges at one of two main delivery centers in southern and central Maine) via an encrypted database system in January 2018. Follow-up email reminders were sent weekly for three weeks. Questions addressed use of OMM for specific indications, knowledge of OMM, and perceived barriers use of OMM.

Results

The survey response rate was 73 of 172 (42%); 95% of respondents were physicians (n=69). Due to the low response rate of non-physicians, only data from physicians was included in the study. Data were summarized descriptively as frequencies (n [%]). The highest rates of OMM utilization were during the third trimester (35 [51.5%]) and postpartum (41 [60.3%]) periods, while the lowest rates of utilization were in the intrapartum (eight [11.9%]) and first trimester periods (26 [38.3%]). Osteopathic physicians (n=19) used OMM more frequently in the first, second, and third trimesters, as well as the intrapartum period (10 [52.6%]; 11 [57.9%]; 14 [73.7%]; and six [31.6%], respectively) compared with their allopathic physician (n=50) counterparts (nine [8%]; 15 [30%]; 21 [42%]; and two [4%], respectively). While osteopathic physicians reported higher frequencies of OMM use and referral for non-musculoskeletal indications such as constipation, edema, and nasal congestion (13 [68.4%]; 11 [57.9%]; 10 [52.6%], respectively), musculoskeletal complaints were the most frequently cited indication for OMM use among both osteopathic and allopathic physicians (low back, 67 [97.1%]; pelvis, 65 [94.2%]; coccyx, 50 [72.5%]; and head, 49 [71%]).

Conclusion

These results suggest that more education is needed about OMM use in the obstetric population, particularly during early trimesters and the intrapartum period, as well as for visceral and lymphatic complaints of pregnancy.

Does Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment Induce Autonomic Changes in Healthy Participants? A Thermal Imaging Study

Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) has been demonstrated to be an effective therapy in several clinical conditions and age groups. Despite the clinical effectiveness, lack of robust data in terms of neurobiological, specifically autonomic, mechanisms of action is observed. Preliminary studies showed a parasympathetic effect leading to a trophotropic effect of OMT. However, these data are limited to heart rate variability (HRV) analysis. In order to study further the role of OMT on the autonomic nervous system, a cross-over randomized controlled trial RCT has been designed to test the effect of osteopathic treatment compared to sham therapy on a range of autonomic parameters. Thermal images, HRV and skin conductance data were collected on a sample of healthy adults. The study design consisted of two sessions (OMT and SHAM), 1 treatment per week, lasting 35 min each, composed of 5 min of baseline, 25 min of treatment, and 5 min of post-touch. During the baseline and the post-treatment, participants received no touch. Thirty-seven participants (aged 27 ± 5 years old, male ratio 40%) completed the study. Multivariate analysis showed a significant parasympathetic effect of group as well as of epoch on thermographic data of the nose (estimate 0.38; 95% CI 0.12–0.63; p < 0.01), left (0.17; 0.06–0.27; <0.001) and right (0.16; 0.07–0.24; <0.001) perioral as well as on the forehead (0.07; 0.01–0.12; <0.01) regions but not for the chin (0.08; −0.02 to 0.18; 0.13). Consistent with a parasympathetic effect, analyses demonstrated a difference between OMT and sham groups on the nuHF (p < 0.001) and DFA-a1 (p < 0.01) as well as on skin conductance (<0.01). The present research supports the hypothesis that a single session of OMT as compared to sham induces autonomic consequences in healthy non-symptomatic adults. Clinicaltrial.gov identifier: NCT03888456, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03888456.

Outcomes and outcomes measurements used in intervention studies of pelvic girdle pain and lumbopelvic pain: a systematic review

Background

Pelvic girdle pain is a common problem during pregnancy and postpartum with significant personal and societal impact and costs. Studies examining the effectiveness of interventions for pelvic girdle pain measure different outcomes, making it difficult to pool data in meta-analysis in a meaningful and interpretable way to increase the certainty of effect measures. A consensus-based core outcome set for pelvic girdle pain can address this issue. As a first step in developing a core outcome set, it is essential to systematically examine the outcomes measured in existing studies.

Objective

The objective of this systematic review was to identify, examine and compare what outcomes are measured and reported, and how outcomes are measured, in intervention studies and systematic reviews of interventions for pelvic girdle pain and for lumbopelvic pain (which includes pelvic girdle pain).

Methods

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, PEDro and Embase from inception to the 11th May 2018. Two reviewers independently selected studies by title/abstract and by full text screening. Disagreement was resolved through discussion. Outcomes reported and their outcome measurement instruments were extracted and recorded by two reviewers independently. We assessed the quality of reporting with two independent reviewers. The outcomes were grouped into core domains using the OMERACT filter 2.0 framework.

Results

A total of 107 studies were included, including 33 studies on pelvic girdle pain and 74 studies on lumbopelvic pain. Forty-six outcomes were reported across all studies, with the highest amount (26/46) in the 'life impact' domain. 'Pain' was the most commonly reported outcome in both pelvic girdle pain and lumbopelvic pain studies. Studies used different instruments to measure the same outcomes, particularly for the outcomes pain, function, disability and quality of life.

Conclusions

A wide variety of outcomes and outcome measurements are used in studies on pelvic girdle pain and lumbopelvic pain. The findings of this review will be included in a Delphi survey to reach consensus on a pelvic girdle pain - core outcome set. This core outcome set will allow for more effective comparison between future studies on pelvic girdle pain, allowing for more effective translation of findings to clinical practice.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information accompanies this paper at 10.1186/s12998-019-0279-2.

Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine Consultations for Hospitalized Patients

Context

Although osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is predominantly known for its benefits in improving musculoskeletal pain, many studies have examined the effects of OMT on hospitalized patients with a variety of conditions, showing improved outcomes in conditions such as pneumonia, postoperative and postpartum recovery, preterm newborn recovery, and newborn feeding dysfunction.

Objective

To determine the reasons osteopathic manipulative medicine (OMM) consultations are being ordered at a tertiary care teaching hospital.

Methods

This descriptive study was conducted at an academic medical center with a well-established electronic health record system. A retrospective review examined data on all OMM consultations between January 1, 2015, and June 30, 2015. Reasons for consultations in a free text field were grouped into categories of "primary reason for consult" by a single reviewer. Demographics and patient location were also assessed.

Results

Of 1310 total consultations included in the study, 620 (47.0%) listed a musculoskeletal complaint as the primary or only reason for a consultation, 231 (18.0%) of which were for back pain, followed by neck pain (69 [5.0%]) and headache (46 [4.0%]). The next most common reason for consultation was for newborn feeding difficulty (352 [27.0%]) or other newborn consultation (66 [5.0%]). A total of 272 consultations (21.0%) were not limited to musculoskeletal complaints and included general nonspecific discomfort (96 [7.0%]) or respiratory complaint (53 [4.0%]). A total of 209 (16.0%) consultations noted patients to be postoperative; 124 (9.5%) to be postpartum; 57 (4.4%) to have cystic fibrosis; and 21 (1.6%) to have constipation.

Conclusion

The majority of inpatient OMM consultations were placed for musculoskeletal complaints, followed by newborn feeding problems. Although it is clear that some physicians think that OMT will help their patients for the aforementioned conditions, the number was still quite low, suggesting that many physicians may be unaware that OMT can help patients with conditions such as respiratory disorder, postoperative recovery, and constipation. There are many opportunities for treatment teams to be ordering OMM consultations as a way to reduce morbidity in their patients.

Osteopathic care for spinal complaints: A systematic literature review

The aim of the current study was to evaluate the literature examining the impact of osteopathic care for spinal complaints. The bibliographic databases Medline (Pubmed), Web of Science, Embase, and PEDro were searched. In addition, a number of grey literature sources were searched. Only randomized controlled trials conducted in high-income Western countries were considered. Two authors independently screened the titles and abstracts. Primary outcomes included ‘pain’ and ‘functional status’, while secondary outcomes included ‘medication use’ and ‘health status’. It was examined if differences existed related to the treatment protocol and geography (European vs. US studies). Study quality was assessed using the risk of bias tool of the Cochrane Back Review Group. Nineteen studies were included and qualitatively synthesized. Nine studies were from the US, followed by Germany with seven studies. The majority of studies (n = 13) focused on low back pain. In general, mixed findings related to the impact of osteopathic care on primary and secondary outcomes were observed. For the primary outcomes, a clear distinction between US and European studies was found, in favor of the latter ones. Studies were characterized by substantial methodological differences in sample sizes, number of treatments, control groups, and follow-up. In conclusion, there is some evidence suggesting that osteopathic care may be effective for people suffering from spinal complaints. Further studies with larger study samples and assessment of long-term impact are required to further increase the evidence-based knowledge of the potential of osteopathic care for individuals suffering from spinal complaints.

Profile of osteopathic practice in Spain: results from a standardized data collection study

Background

There is limited research regarding patients’ profiles and consumer attitudes and habits of osteopathy in Spain. The purpose of this study was to profile patients who regularly receive osteopathic care in Spain using an internationally developed standardized data collection tool.

Method

During the period between April 2014 and December 2015, a UK-developed standardized data collection tool was distributed to Spanish osteopaths who voluntarily agreed to participate in this cross-sectional study.

Results

Thirty-six osteopaths participated in this study and returned a total of 314 completed datasets. Of 314 patients, 61% were women and 39% were men, with a mean age of 40 years (SD 17.02 years, range 0 to 83 years). Forty-four percent were full-time salaried workers, and in 78% of cases, receiving osteopathic treatment was the patient’s own choice. Chronic spinal pain presentations were the most frequent reasons for consultation. Seventy-five percent of patients presented with a coexisting condition, mainly gastrointestinal disorders and headaches. The main treatment approach consisted of mobilization techniques, followed by soft tissue, cranial and high velocity thrust techniques. Improvement or resolution of the complaint was experienced by 93% of patients after a small number of sessions. Adverse events were minor and occurred in 7% of all cases.

Conclusion

This is the first study carried out in Spain analyzing the profile of patients who receive osteopathic care. The typical patient who receives osteopathic care in Spain is middle-aged, presents mainly with chronic spinal pain, and voluntarily seeks osteopathic treatment. Osteopathic treatment produces a significant improvement in the majority of cases with a low rate of minor adverse events reported.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12906-018-2190-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Ultrasonographic Evaluation of the Effect of Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment on Sacral Base Asymmetry

Context

Patients with low back pain (LBP) may receive osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) to resolve or manage their pain. The indication for OMT for patients with LBP is the presence of somatic dysfunction, diagnosed using palpatory examination. Because palpatory findings commonly have poor interexaminer reliability, the current study used ultrasonography (US) to establish pre-OMT and post-OMT musculoskeletal measurements of relative asymmetry between pelvic and sacral bony landmarks.

Objective

To document objective musculoskeletal changes that occur in response to OMT using US and to compare palpatory assessment of landmark asymmetry with US assessment.

Methods

Sixty men and women aged 20 to 55 years with at least 1 episode of LBP in the past 2 weeks were assigned to a seated control, walking control, or OMT group (20 participants per group). Participants received an initial, bilateral US measurement of the skin to posterior superior iliac spine (SPSIS), skin to sacral base position (SBP), and sacral sulcus depth (SSD). Participants in seated control and OMT groups received a palpatory assessment of SBP and SSD prior to initial US assessment. After assessment, the seated control group sat in a waiting room for 30 minutes, the walking control group walked for 5 minutes, and the OMT group received OMT to address sacral base asymmetry using predominantly direct techniques for a maximum of 20 minutes. Participants then received a second US assessment of the same structures.

Results

Body mass index (BMI) was correlated with SPSIS (r=0.5, P=.001) and SBP (r=0.6, P<.001). More participants in seated control (75%) and OMT (65%) groups had an increase in asymmetry from first to second US assessment for SPSIS compared with participants in the walking control group (35%, P=.05). No significant differences were found between groups for absolute asymmetry or total change in asymmetry (all P>.10). The κ was −0.1 (95% CI, −0.2 to 0.03) for SBP and −0.01 (95% CI, −0.1 to 0.1) for SSD.

Conclusion

Musculoskeletal changes in SPSIS and SBP measurements related to OMT could not be readily identified using US. The SPSIS and SBP measurements were dependent on BMI, which may have affected the accuracy of US to detect small changes in asymmetry. Qualitative palpatory assessments did not correlate with US measurements. Further study is needed to identify US measurements that demonstrate change with OMT. (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02820701)

Predictive factors for reporting adverse events following spinal manipulation in randomized clinical trials - secondary analysis of a systematic review

While spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is recommended for the treatment of spinal disorders, concerns exist about adverse events associated with the intervention. Adequate reporting of adverse events in clinical trials would allow for more accurate estimations of incidence statistics through meta-analysis. However, it is not currently known if there are factors influencing adverse events reporting following SMT in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Thus our objective was to investigate predictive factors for the reporting of adverse events in published RCTs involving SMT. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for RCTs involving SMT. Domains of interest included: sample size; publication date relative to the 2010 CONSORT statement; risk of bias; the region treated; and number of intervention sessions. 7398 records were identified, of which 368 articles were eligible for inclusion. A total of 140 (38.0%) articles reported on adverse events. Articles were more likely to report on adverse events if they possessed larger sample sizes, were published after the 2010 CONSORT statement, had a low risk of bias and involved multiple intervention sessions. The region treated was not a significant predictor for reporting on adverse events. Predictors for reporting on adverse events included larger sample size, publication after the 2010 CONSORT statement, low risk of bias and trials involving multiple intervention sessions. We recommend that researchers focus on developing robust methodologies and participant follow-up regimens for RCTs involving SMT.

Post-sternotomy pain syndrome following cardiac surgery: case report

Over 2 million people undergo sternotomy worldwide for heart surgery each year, and many develop post-sternotomy pain syndrome (PSPS) which persists in the anterior thorax. In some patients, PSPS lasts for many years or suddenly reappears a long time after the sternotomy. The exact etiology of PSPS is unknown. This article presents a case report of a patient with a diagnosis of PSPS (after cardiac surgery 4 years prior) for whom an osteopathic approach was used, which successfully eliminated the pain. In a previous study, we demonstrated that this osteopathic procedure could reduce sternal pain associated with a recent surgical wound. Further efforts are needed to understand the reasons for PSPS. In light of new scientific data, these osteopathic techniques could contribute to a multidisciplinary approach to solve the problem.

Efficacy of Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment for Management of Postpartum Pain

Context: Pain is one of the most common postpartum complaints by women in the United States, and the pain varies in its location. Research on intervention strategies for postpartum pain has focused primarily on the lower back, but pain management for other types of postpartum pain remains unclear.

Objective: To investigate the effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) on postpartum pain; the location, quality, and timing of pain; and the difference in pain between vaginal and cesarean delivery.

Methods: Postpartum patients who reported having pain were recruited at St Barnabas Hospital in Bronx, New York. The short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire was administered along with a screening questionnaire. Second- or third-year residents in neuromusculoskeletal medicine and osteopathic manipulative medicine examined patients and then diagnosed and managed somatic dysfunction with OMT for approximately 25 minutes. The short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire was again administered after OMT. Paired t tests and McNemar tests were used to analyze changes before and after OMT for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Differences in visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores between patients who had vaginal vs cesarean delivery were tested using analysis of variance, and group differences in pain location were tested using a Pearson χ2 test.

Results: A total of 59 patients were included in the study. The mean VAS score for pain was 5.0 before OMT and 2.9 after OMT (P<.001). The VAS scores before OMT significantly differed between patients who had a vaginal delivery and those who had a cesarean delivery (P<.001), but the mean decrease in VAS score was similar in both groups. Decreases in low back pain (34 [57.6%] before and 16 [27.1%] after OMT), abdominal pain (32 [54.2%] before and 22 [37.3%] after OMT), and vaginal pain (11 [18.6%] before and 5 [8.5%] after OMT) were reported after OMT (P<.05).

Conclusion: Preliminary results demonstrate that OMT is efficacious for postpartum pain management. The lack of a control group precludes the ability to make causal claims. Future studies are needed to solidify OMT efficacy and generalizability.