The effects of osteopathic treatment on psychosocial factors in people with persistent pain: A systematic review

Effects of manual osteopathic interventions on psychometric and psychophysiological indicators of anxiety, depression and stress in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether osteopathic and related manual interventions improve adult mental health (depression, anxiety, stress) and psychophysiological measures (eg, heart rate variability, skin conductance).

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, Cochrane, and AMED, searched through September 2024.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

English-language RCTs with ≥30 participants investigating osteopathic or related manual therapies (eg, myofascial release, high-velocity low-amplitude thrusts) delivered by qualified practitioners, compared with no treatment or sham, and reporting immediate postintervention mental health or psychophysiological outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Full-text screening, risk-of-bias assessment and data extraction were conducted independently by multiple reviewers using a standardised Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Extraction Form. Risk of bias was assessed using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist. For meta-analyses, Hedges' g (with 95% CIs) was calculated from postintervention means and SD. Random-effects models accounted for heterogeneity, and prediction intervals were calculated to assess uncertainty in effect estimates.

RESULTS

20 RCTs were included. Osteopathic interventions reduced depression (Hedges' g=-0.47, 95% CI: -0.86 to -0.09, p=0.02) and increased skin conductance (Hedges' g=0.67, 95% CI: 0.00 to 1.34, p=0.05). Depression improvements were greater in pain populations (Hedges' g=-0.61, 95% CI: -1.06 to -0.17, p=0.01). However, wide prediction intervals and moderate heterogeneity indicate uncertainty in true effect sizes, and limited studies and sample sizes restrict assessment of publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Osteopathic and related manual therapies may reduce depression and influence certain psychophysiological markers, particularly in pain populations, but uncertainty and heterogeneity limit confidence. More rigorous, larger, and longitudinal RCTs are needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This meta-analysis was not formally registered, though the protocol and search strategy can be found at Open Science Framework, registration identification: https://osf.io/jrtpx/.

Integrated manual therapies: IASP taskforce viewpoint

Introduction

Manual therapy refers to a range of hands-on interventions used by various clinical professionals, such as osteopaths, osteopathic physicians, chiropractors, massage therapists, physiotherapists, and physical therapists, to treat patients experiencing pain.

Objectives

To present existing evidence of mechanisms and clinical effectiveness of manual therapy in pain.

Methods

This Clinical Update focuses on the 2023 International Association for the Study of Pain Global Year for Integrative Pain Care. Current models of manual therapy and examples of integrative manual therapy are discussed.

Results

The evolution of concepts in recent years are presented and current gaps in knowledge to guide future research highlighted. Mechanisms of manual therapy are discussed, including specific and contextual effects. Findings from research on animal and humans in manual therapy are presented including on inflammatory markers, fibrosis, and behaviours. There is low to moderate levels of evidence that the effect sizes for manual therapy range from small to large for pain and function in tension headache, cervicogenic headache, fibromyalgia, low back pain, neck pain, knee pain, and hip pain.

Conclusion

Manual therapies appear to be effective for a variety of conditions with minimal safety concerns. There are opportunities for manual therapies to integrate new evidence in its educational, clinical, and research models. Manual therapies are also well-suited to fostering a person-centred approach to care, requiring the clinician to relinquish some of their power to the person consulting. Integrated manual therapies have recently demonstrated a fascinating evolution illustrating their adaptability and capacity to address contemporary societal challenges.

Integrated management of osteopathy and rehabilitation for complex regional pain syndrome: A case report

Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a debilitating condition that typically affects one limb, often triggered by acute trauma. Symptoms include persistent pain, skin sensitivity, swelling, and mobility issues. While various therapeutic approaches exist, evidence for the effectiveness of multimodal treatments is limited. A 25-year-old female presented with CRPS following a sciatic nerve injury due to an intramuscular injection. She experienced severe pain, swelling, and limited mobility in her left ankle. Physical therapy assessment revealed significant weakness and limitations in both active and passive range of motion due to pain and swelling. The patient underwent a holistic treatment consisting of osteopathy and rehabilitation exercises over 36 sessions spanning 9 months. Significant improvements were observed after treatment, including reduced pain, increased mobility, and improved nerve conduction. These findings suggest that a multimodal therapeutic approach may be beneficial in managing CRPS and improving patients' quality of life.

The Effects of Spinal Manipulation Added to Exercise on Pain and Quality of Life in Patients with Thoracic Spinal Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

There are not enough reliable studies available in physiotherapy to determine the effects of spinal manipulative therapy added to exercise on thoracic spinal pain and quality of life.

Objective

To investigate the effects of spinal manipulation on pain and quality of life in subjects with thoracic spinal pain. Study Design. It was an open-label "randomized controlled trial." Study Settings. Department of Physiotherapy, Services Hospital, Lahore, Pakistan. Participants. There were one hundred subjects with an age group between 18 and 60 years fulfilling the inclusion criteria. These subjects were divided equally into two groups; an experimental and a control group.

Methods

In the experimental group (n = 50), thoracic spinal manipulation was applied along with thoracic muscle strengthening exercises. In the control group (n = 50) thoracic muscle exercises alone were given. Pain was measured by visual analogue scale (VAS) and quality of life with SF-36. Measurements were taken at baseline, immediately after session, after 8th session, and later as follow-ups at 12 weeks. Repeated measure ANOVA and independent sample T-test were used for within and between-group comparisons.

Results

Mean age of subjects in control group was 38.56 ± 12.44 and in experimental group was 36.02 ± 11.32. Both groups demonstrated significant improvement in VAS score, and all domains of SF 36 but between-group comparison showed greater improvement in VAS of the experimental group compared to the baseline (P < 0.05), but between-group comparison of 8th session to follow-up has shown that effects of exercise persist while health-related quality of life in spinal manipulation group was significantly reduced after discontinuation of treatment. After the 8th session, spinal manipulation group showed notable results in terms of pain (mean diff 1.14 (0.62, 1.65) 95% CI and all aspects of SF 36 (P value <0.05). However, after week 12 of follow-up, no significant difference (P value >0.05) was observed among the study groups for pain and quality of life.

Conclusion

Spinal manipulation added to thoracic exercise was more effective than thoracic exercise alone for improving pain and quality of life at the end of 8th session of care. However, the inclusion of spinal manipulation was not found effective at the 12-week follow-up. This trial is registered with IRCT20190327043125N1.

Common reported barriers and facilitators for self-management in adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain: A systematic review of qualitative studies

BACKGROUND

Self-management strategies are considered a necessary component of chronic musculoskeletal pain management to address ongoing symptoms and challenges. However uptake of self-management can be impeded by a number of factors.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to explore common impeding and facilitating factors of self-management strategies from the patient perspective.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed between 2009 to May 2020 for the following databases: MEDLINE, AMED, PsychINFO, Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro, and Google Scholar. The search terms included peer-reviewed qualitative or mixed-method studies investigating the perspective of chronic musculoskeletal pain patients in regards to the use of self-management strategies. Study rigor and bias was assessed using the CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) questionnaire specific to qualitative studies. Qualitative data was coded using a three-stage thematic synthesis process. Confidence in findings was assessed using CERQual (The Confidence in the Evidence from Review of Qualitative Research).

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies were included with 487 participants. Six major themes were identified and divided into external and internal influencing factors. The external influencing factors were made up of the following three themes: health care practitioner role, supportive environment, accessibility. While the three internal influencing themes were: physical factors, knowledge and understanding, and psychological factors.

CONCLUSION

Learning to self-manage for patients in chronic pain required ongoing support either from healthcare practitioners or from social circles. To further assist the self-management process practitioners can improve self-efficacy through increasing patient knowledge of chronic pain, utilising goal setting and finding ways an individual can access ongoing support, either from the practitioner or through group programs.

Osteopathy and Mental Health: An Embodied, Predictive, and Interoceptive Framework

Globally, mental and musculoskeletal disorders present with high prevalence, disease burden, and comorbidity. In order to improve the quality of care for patients with persistent physical and comorbid mental health conditions, person-centered care approaches addressing psychosocial factors are currently advocated. Central to successful person-centered care is a multidisciplinary collaboration between mental health and musculoskeletal specialists underpinned by a robust therapeutic alliance. Such a collaborative approach might be found in osteopathy, which is typically utilized to treat patients with musculoskeletal disorders but may arguably also benefit mental health outcomes. However, research and practice exploring the reputed effect of osteopathy on patients with mental health problems lack a robust framework. In this hypothesis and theory article, we build upon research from embodied cognition, predictive coding, interoception, and osteopathy to propose an embodied, predictive and interoceptive framework that underpins osteopathic person-centered care for individuals with persistent physical and comorbid mental health problems. Based on the premise that, for example, chronic pain and comorbid depression are underlined by overly precise predictions or imprecise sensory information, we hypothesize that osteopathic treatment may generate strong interoceptive prediction errors that update the generative model underpinning the experience of pain and depression. Thus, physical and mental symptoms may be reduced through active and perceptual inference. We discuss how these theoretical perspectives can inform future research into osteopathy and mental health to reduce the burden of comorbid psychological factors in patients with persistent physical symptoms and support person-centered multidisciplinary care in mental health.

Osteopathic empirical research: a bibliometric analysis from 1966 to 2018

Background

Despite the increasing use of osteopathy, a manipulative complementary and alternative medicine therapy, in the general population, its efficacy continues to be debated. In this era of evidence-based practice, no studies have previously reviewed the scientific literature in the field to identify published knowledge, trends and gaps in empirical research. The aims of this bibliometric analysis are to describe characteristics of articles published on the efficacy of osteopathic interventions and to provide an overall portrait of their impacts in the scientific literature.

Methods

A bibliometric analysis approach was used. Articles were identified with searches using a combination of relevant MeSH terms and indexing keywords about osteopathy and research designs in MEDLINE and CINAHL databases. The following indicators were extracted: country of primary author, year of publication, journals, impact factor of the journal, number of citations, research design, participants’ age group, system/body part addressed, primary outcome, indexing keywords and types of techniques.

Results

A total of 389 articles met the inclusion criteria. The number of empirical studies doubled every 5 years, with the United States, Italy, Spain, and United Kingdom being the most productive countries. Twenty-three articles were cited over 100 times. Articles were published in 103 different indexed journals, but more than half (53.7%) of articles were published in one of three osteopathy-focused readership journals. Randomized control trials (n = 145; 37.3%) and case reports (n = 142; 36.5%) were the most common research designs. A total of 187 (48.1%) studies examined the effects of osteopathic interventions using a combination of techniques that belonged to two or all of the classic fields of osteopathic interventions (musculoskeletal, cranial, and visceral).

Conclusion

The number of osteopathy empirical studies increased significantly from 1980 to 2014. The productivity appears to be very much in sync with practice development and innovations; however, the articles were mainly published in osteopathic journals targeting a limited, disciplinary-focused readership.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12906-021-03366-3.

Dropout associated with osteopathic manual treatment for chronic noncancerous pain in randomized controlled trials

CONTEXT

Reviews exploring harm outcomes such as adverse effects (AE), all cause dropouts (ACD), dropouts due to inefficacy, and dropouts due to AE associated with osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) or osteopathic manual therapy (OMTh) are scant.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the overall AE, ACD, dropouts due to inefficacy, and AE in chronic noncancerous pain (CNCP) patients receiving OMTh through a systematic review of previous literature.

METHODS

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, the authors searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), EMCare, and Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), and Ostmed.Dr, as well as the bibliographical references of previous systematic reviews evaluating OMTh for pain severity, disability, quality of life, and return to work outcomes. Randomized controlled trials with CNCP patients 18 years or older with OMTh as an active or combination intervention and the presence of a control or combination group were eligible for inclusion. In this sub-study of a previous, larger systematic review, 11 studies (n=1,015) reported data that allowed the authors to perform meta-analyses on ACD and dropouts due to AE. The risk of bias (ROB) was assessed with the Cochrane ROB tool and the quality of evidence was determined with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis showed that ACD was not significantly different for visceral OMTh (vOMTh) vs. OMTh control (odds ratio [OR]=2.66 [95% confidence interval [[CI]], 0.28, 24.93]) or for OMTh vs. standard care (OR=1.26 [95% CI, 0.84, 1.89]; I²=0%). Single study analysis showed that OMTh results were nonsignificant in comparison with chemonucleolysis, gabapentin, and exercise. OMTh in combination with gabapentin (vs. gabapentin alone) and OMTh in combination with exercise (vs. exercise alone) showed nonsignificant ACD. Dropouts due to AE were not significantly different, but the results could not be pooled due to an insufficient number of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Most articles did not explicitly report AEs, ACD rates, or dropouts due to AEs and inefficacy. The limited data available on dropouts showed that OMTh was well tolerated compared with control interventions, and that the ACD and dropouts due to AEs were not significantly different than comparators. Future trials should focus on explicit reporting of dropouts along with beneficial outcomes to provide a better understanding of OMTh efficacy.

Osteopathic Manual Treatment for Pain Severity, Functional Improvement, and Return to Work in Patients With Chronic Pain

Context

Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is associated with disability, poor quality of life (QOL), and failure to return to work (RTW). Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) or osteopathic manual therapy (OMTh) are increasingly offered to patients with CNCP; however, the existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the literature that explore the effectiveness of OMTh have major limitations.

Objective

To systematically evaluate the quality of evidence documenting the effectiveness of OMTh for patients with CNCP using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, and to evaluate the efficacy of OMTh in patients with CNCP through a meta-analysis of pooled data from previous studies.

Methods

We searched online the databases Ovid, MEDLINE, Embase, OSTMED.DR, EMCare, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), as well as the bibliographic references of previous systematic review articles evaluating OMTh for pain severity, disability, QOL, or RTW outcomes. Eligibility included randomized controlled trials methodology, CNCP patients 18 years or older, use of previously validated assessment tools, use of OMTh as an active or combination intervention, and presence of a control or comparison group. We pooled studies based on the homogeneity between OMT comparator treatment and outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the quality of evidence was determined with GRADE.

Results

Sixteen randomized controlled trials (n=1158 patients) were eligible for data extraction. Moderate quality evidence showed that OMTh vs. standard care was significantly associated with a reduction in pain [standardized mean difference (95% CI)=[-.37 (-.58, -.17)] and disability [-.28 (-.46, -.10)], as well as improved QOL [.67 (.29, 1.05)]. Moderate quality evidence showed that OMTh plus exercise vs. exercise only was significantly associated with reduction in pain severity [-1.25 (-1.67, -.83)] and disability [-1.15 (-1.57, -.74)]. Moderate quality evidence showed that using visceral OMTh vs. general OMTh was significantly associated with reduction in pain severity [-.74 (-1.09, -.39)] and disability [-.52 (-.91, -.13)]. In comparison to physiotherapy, gabapentin, and OMTh plus gabapentin, OMTh did not show any significant effect for any of the outcomes. OMTh vs. standard care did not show significant improvement in RTW at 12 weeks, although the effect was significant at 8 weeks after OMTh.

Conclusion

Moderate quality evidence suggests that OMTh is effective for CNCP patients. There was a significant association between visceral OMTh and reduced pain severity and disability. More robust, high-quality randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes are required to further explore the effectiveness of the OMTh in the management of CNCP.

Empathy in Medicine Osteopathic and Allopathic Physician Interpersonal Manner, Empathy, and Communication Style and Clinical Status of Their Patients: A Pain Registry–Based Study

Context

Comparisons of osteopathic physicians (ie, DOs) and allopathic physicians (ie, MDs) on interpersonal manner, including empathy and communication style, have been limited by such methodologic issues as self-assessment and a focus on medical students rather than practicing physicians.

Objective

To compare perceptions of the interpersonal manner, empathy, and communication style of DOs and MDs and corresponding clinical measures reported by their patients.

Methods

A cross-sectional study of adults with subacute or chronic low back pain was conducted within the PRECISION Pain Research Registry from April 2016 through December 2018. A total of 313 patients having their physician for 1 year or longer reported sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, including use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids for low back pain. Using validated research instruments, they also reported perceptions of their physician's interpersonal manner, empathy, and communication style and clinical measures of pain catastrophizing, pain self-efficacy, low back pain intensity, back-related disability, and deficits in quality of life relating to sleep disturbance, pain interference with activities, anxiety, depression, and low energy/fatigue.

Results

Patients treated by DOs were less likely to be using NSAIDs (odds ratio [OR], 0.60; 95% CI, 0.36-0.997) or opioids (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.32-0.998) than patients treated by MDs. Patients treated by DOs reported lesser pain catastrophizing (mean, 12.5; 95% CI, 10.1-15.0 for DOs vs 18.1; 95% CI, 16.3-19.9 for MDs; P<.001) and greater pain self-efficacy (mean, 39.5; 95% CI, 36.3-42.8 for DOs vs 35.3; 95% CI, 33.4-37.3 for MDs; P=.03). Correspondingly, patients treated by DOs reported lesser back-related disability (mean, 11.2; 95% CI, 9.9-12.5 for DOs vs 13.5; 95% CI, 12.8-14.3 for MDs; P=.002) and a trend toward lesser deficits in quality of life. Patients reported more favorable perceptions of DOs on interpersonal manner (mean, 4.3; 95% CI, 4.2-4.5 for DOs vs 4.0; 95% CI, 3.9-4.2 for MDs; P=.01) and empathy (mean, 41.2; 95% CI, 39.1-43.3 for DOs vs 38.0; 95% CI, 36.5-39.5 for MDs; P=.02).

Conclusion

The mechanisms underlying lesser use of NSAIDs and opioids, superior clinical status measures, and more favorable perceptions of physician interpersonal manner and empathy reported by patients treated by DOs warrant further investigation.

Protocol for a feasibility and acceptability study using a brief ACT-based intervention for people from Southwest Wales who live with persistent pain

INTRODUCTION

Persistent pain affects a large percentage of the UK population and its burden has wide ramifications that affect physical, psychological, socioeconomic and occupational status. Pain has a significant impact on people's well-being and quality of life. Some of the most common comorbidities found in this population are depression and anxiety and also maladaptive behaviours such as fear avoidance and catastrophising.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a protocol for a study assessing the feasibility and acceptability of a novel Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT)-based intervention for people from Southwest Wales who live with persistent pain. A group of 12 participants will be recruited through the Health and Wellbeing Academy (Swansea University). After being referred by an Osteopath, and attending a brief meeting with the researcher, the participants will take part in six sessions over six consecutive weeks. 'A Mindful Act' is an ACT-based group programme aiming to teach people how to develop more acceptance and self-compassion, be more mindful and clarify personal values in order to live a more rich and meaningful life. The main outcomes will include the feasibility of the recruitment process and the measurement tools, the acceptability of the intervention for both the participants and the Osteopaths and the adherence to the programme. In order to measure acceptability of the intervention, qualitative interviews will be conducted to provide an insight into peoples' experiences of taking part. Data will be analysed using Thematic Analysis, with the use of NVIVO 10. In addition, quantitative data will be collected at baseline, on completion of the programme and at 1 month and 3 months follow-up to reveal any differences in psychological flexibility, depression, anxiety, fear avoidance and general health status. The findings will help enhance the intervention by making appropriate modifications to the processes and procedures involved, following the recommendations made by the Medical Research Council framework. A larger scale study is envisaged to follow, in order to investigate the full effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 'A Mindful Act'.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the College of Human and Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee at Swansea University in December 2017. The findings will be disseminated through various means including: the first author's PhD thesis, peer-reviewed journals as well as well as national and international conferences and public events.

An evaluation of osteopathic treatment on psychological outcomes with patients suffering from chronic pain: A prospective observational cohort study collected through a health and well-being academy

Co-morbid mental health conditions such as anxiety, depression and fear avoidance are often associated with chronic pain. This novel study aimed to explore the impact of osteopathic treatment on several psychological outcome measures relating to anxiety, depression, mental health and fear avoidance for a chronic pain population receiving osteopathic treatment over a 2-week period. The findings show that there were significant reductions in anxiety, pain, mental health dysfunction and improvements in self-care. These results are promising, and it is suggested that now a full-scale randomised controlled trial should be conducted.