Osteopathic decapitation: Why do we consider the head differently from the rest of the body? New perspectives for an evidence-informed osteopathic approach to the head

Applying an osteopathic intervention to improve mild to moderate mental health symptoms: a mixed-methods feasibility study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Mental health services are stretched in the UK and are in need of support. One approach that could improve mental health symptoms is osteopathy. Research suggests that osteopathy influences psychophysiological factors, which could lead to improvements in mental health. The first objective of this protocol is to investigate the feasibility and acceptability of four osteopathic interventions. A secondary aim is to evaluate the interventions' effectiveness for improving psychophysiological and mental health outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study will be an explanatory mixed-methods design. Participants will be 30 adults who have mild to moderate mental health symptoms and not experiencing any issues with pain. The feasibility and acceptability of the interventions will be the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes will be physiological measures including heart rate variability, interoceptive accuracy and blood pressure. Psychological outcomes, collected preintervention and postintervention, will also be measured by five standardised questionnaires, which include: (1) the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS); (2) the International Positive and Negative Affect Schedule-Short-Form; (3) Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II; (4) the Self as Context Scale and (5) and the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness Version 2. Participants will be randomised to one of four intervention groups and receive a single intervention treatment session. These intervention groups are: (1) high-velocity and articulation techniques, (2) soft-tissue massage, (3) craniosacral techniques, and (4) a combination of these three approaches. Mixed design two (preintervention and postintervention) by the four interventions analysis of covariance models will be used to analyse the quantitative data for each quantitative measure. Participants will also be interviewed about their experiences of the study and interventions and a thematic analysis will be used to analyse this qualitative data. This will aid the assessment of the feasibility and acceptability of the study design.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol for this feasibility study has received ethical approval from the Department of Psychology Ethics Committee at Swansea University, ethical review reference number: 2022-5603-4810. Feasibility results from this protocol will be published in a peer review journal and presented at both national and international conferences.

DISCUSSION

This study will assess the feasibility and acceptability of conducting osteopathic interventions for improving mental health outcomes. The results from this will help to inform the development of a future randomised controlled trial. The study will also produce original data which could provide preliminary evidence of whether osteopathic approaches are of benefit to individual's mental health in the form of effect sizes, even if they are pain-free.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05674071.

A Pilot Study of Jugular Compression (Queckenstedt maneuver) for Cranial Movement Perception

Context

Osteopathy in the cranial field (OCF) is among the most controversial topics of osteopathic practice. The mechanism by which cranial movement (CM) occurs is poorly understood, but includes speculation that intracranial pressure can generate a movement of the cranial bones. If this model is valid, an increase in intracranial pressure produced by bilateral compression of internal jugular veins, or the Queckenstedt maneuver (Q-test), should be detectable.

Objective

To determine whether osteopaths can perceive a palpable change in CM when the Q-test is applied.

Methods

Blindfolded osteopaths experienced in OCF evaluated the CM of volunteers as a trained clinician applied the Q-test. The osteopaths reported any change in CM amplitude during 3 different 1-minute periods. The total number of variations perceived in each period (PV) by all osteopaths on all volunteers was analyzed. The Kruskal Wallis test was used to evaluate the differences between the test periods. The Mann-Whitney test was used for a pairwise comparison. Statistical significance was set at P≤.05.

Results

Eight osteopaths participated in this study and evaluated the CM of 6 volunteers. A Kruskal-Wallis test of the PV between monitoring periods revealed a statistically significant difference (P<.001). A Mann-Whitney Test showed there was a significant increase in PV between the compression period and the 2 other monitoring periods (base P=.003 and expectation P=.009).

Conclusion

Osteopaths could detect a change in the amplitude of CM after the Q-test was applied. Although this was a small-scale pilot study, our data represent a starting point for understanding whether an intracranial or an extracranial mechanism is responsible for the CM.

Is there a difference in response to manual cranial bone tissue assessment techniques between participants with cervical and/or temporomandibular complaints versus a control group?

AIM

Manual cranial bone tissue techniques (CBTT) are used by physiotherapists as a tool for assessment and treatment of complaints in the craniocervical, face, and head regions. The goal of this study was to determine whether CBTT were able to discriminate between subjects with cervical and/or temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and a healthy group. In addition, the inter-rater reliability when applying CBTT was also investigated.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted and included 60 participants. Six standardized passive techniques were applied and judged for resistance, compliance, and sensory answer. In order to evaluate the inter-rater reliability of these techniques a cohort of participants was measured twice (by two evaluators) prospectively. A logistic regression model and Receiver Operating Curve (ROC) analyses were used to determining the discriminative validity of these techniques.

RESULTS

Logistic regression identified a significant difference for five techniques for resistance and/or compliance and/or the sensory answer between the groups. Based on the Area Under the Curve (AUC) analysis, the discriminative ability of the temporal rotation to distinguish between the groups was fair to good (for resistance AUC = 0.7775 and for compliance AUC = 0.8065). The highest agreement between the two assessors was for the resistance with occipital compression (73%) technique.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights that some of the CBTT could be potentially useful in distinguishing subjects with cervical and/or TMD from healthy subjects. Inter-rater reliability was moderate. CBTT could be potentially integrated in the examination of participants with complaints in the craniofacial region.