A profile of osteopathic care in private practices in the United Kingdom: a national pilot using standardised data collection

The Use of Exercise Prescription in Australian Osteopathy Practice: Secondary Analysis of a Nationally Representative Sample of the Profession

Introduction

Exercise is beneficial for improving general health, wellbeing, and specific medical conditions. In musculoskeletal conditions such as chronic low back and neck pain, prescribed exercise has been found to be moderately effective in decreasing pain and improving function. Osteopaths are primary contact health professionals who manage predominantly musculoskeletal complaints. This work presents a secondary data analysis of the Australian osteopathy practice-based research network and profiles the characteristics of osteopaths who often use exercise prescription in patient care. Methodology. Secondary analysis of a cross-sectional survey of 992 osteopaths was registered with the Osteopathy Research and Innovation Network, an Australian practice-based research network. Demographics, practice, and treatment characteristics of Australian osteopaths who "often" use exercise prescription in patient care were examined.

Results

Seven-hundred and thirty-three Australian osteopaths (74%) indicated that they use exercise prescription "often" in patient care. Australian osteopaths who often use exercise prescription are more likely to be colocated with another osteopath (ORa 1.54) and send referrals to an exercise physiologist (ORa 1.94) and a specialist medical practitioner (ORa 1.72). Those osteopaths who often used exercise prescription were also more likely to discuss physical activity (ORa 5.61) and nutrition (ORa 1.90). Australian osteopaths who use exercise prescription often were more likely to treat patients with sports injuries (ORa 2.43) and use soft tissue techniques (ORa 1.92), trigger point techniques (ORa 2.72), and sports taping (ORa 1.78).

Conclusion

Osteopaths who utilise exercise prescription were more likely to discuss physical activity, diet, and nutrition and utilise referral networks with specialist medical practitioners and exercise physiologists. Australian osteopaths who often use exercise prescriptions were also more likely to treat patients with sport injury. The results suggest that most Australian osteopaths use exercise prescription and have referral networks with other health professionals for patient management. Further work is required to explore the type of exercise prescription used and for what conditions.

Avoiding nocebo and other undesirable effects in chiropractic, osteopathy and physiotherapy: An invitation to reflect

INTRODUCTION

While the placebo effect is increasingly recognised as a contributor to treatment effects in clinical practice, the nocebo and other undesirable effects are less well explored and likely underestimated. In the chiropractic, osteopathy and physiotherapy professions, some aspects of historical models of care may arguably increase the risk of nocebo effects.

PURPOSE

In this masterclass article, clinicians, researchers, and educators are invited to reflect on such possibilities, in an attempt to stimulate research and raise awareness for the mitigation of such undesirable effects.

IMPLICATIONS

This masterclass briefly introduces the nocebo effect and its underlying mechanisms. It then traces the historical development of chiropractic, osteopathy, and physiotherapy, arguing that there was and continues to be an excessive focus on the patient's body. Next, aspects of clinical practice, including communication, the therapeutic relationship, clinical rituals, and the wider social and economic context of practice are examined for their potential to generate nocebo and other undesirable effects. To aid reflection, a model to reflect on clinical practice and individual professions through the 'prism' of nocebo and other undesirable effects is introduced and illustrated. Finally, steps are proposed for how researchers, educators, and practitioners can maximise positive and minimise negative clinical context.

The Austrian Osteopathic Practitioners Estimates and RAtes (OPERA): A cross-sectional survey

INTRODUCTION

Since the previous survey of the osteopathic profession in Austria was almost a decade ago, an update was necessary. The Osteopathic Practitioners Estimates and RAtes (OPERA) project was developed as a Europe-based survey, whereby an updated profile of the profession not only provides new data for Austria, but also allows for a clear comparison with other European countries.

METHODS

A voluntary, online-based, closed-ended survey was distributed across Austria in the period between April and August 2020. The original English OPERA-questionnaire, composed of 52 questions in seven sections, was formally translated in German and adapted to the Austrian situation. Recruitment was performed through social-media and an e-based campaign.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 338 individuals, of which 239 (71%) were female, and the median age was 40-49 years. Almost all respondents had preliminary healthcare training, mainly in physiotherapy (72%). The majority of respondents were self-employed (88%) and working as sole practitioners (54%). The median number of consultations per week was 21-25 and the majority of respondents scheduled 46-60 minutes for each consultation (69%). The most commonly used diagnostic techniques were: palpation of position/structure, palpation of tenderness and visual inspection. The most commonly used treatment techniques were cranial, visceral and articulatory/mobilisation techniques. The majority of patients estimated by respondents consulted an osteopath for musculoskeletal complaints mainly localised in the lumbar and cervical region. Although the majority of respondents experience a strong osteopathic identity, only a small proportion (17%) advertise themselves exclusively as osteopaths.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the first published document to determine the characteristics of the osteopathic practitioners in Austria using large, national data. It provides new information on where, how, and by whom osteopathic care is delivered. The information provided may contribute to the evidence used by stakeholders and policy makers for the future regulation of the profession in Austria.

The Profile of Belgian Osteopaths: A Cross-Sectional Survey

BACKGROUND

This study gives an update on the characteristics of Belgian osteopaths five years after the Benelux Osteosurvey. Additional new data were collected on their professional identity and views on the profession.

METHODS

All Belgian osteopaths who could be contacted (n = 1473) were invited to complete a voluntary, online-based, closed-ended survey distributed between May and September 2018. The survey, composed of 52 questions and seven sections, was formally translated from English to Dutch and French and adapted from the original version. Adult, self-defined osteopaths working in Belgium were eligible. Recruitment of participants was performed through all professional associations and the InterMutualistic Agency. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 332 osteopaths. Thirty-one per cent of the respondents were female. Almost all the respondents were self-employed (99.4%); half of them worked as part of a team (47.6%). Most respondents had a 5-year part-time training, and the majority had a previous academic degree, mainly in physical therapy (65.8%). According to respondents, most patients seek care for lumbar non-specific low back, pelvis and neck pain. Most respondents strongly define themselves as osteopaths and advertise themselves exclusively as osteopaths.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey provided an update of the current characteristics of Belgian osteopathic practitioners and added new information on their professional identity and views on the profession. The information provided could contribute to the body of evidence used by stakeholders and policymakers in the future regulation of the profession in Belgium.

Osteopathic practice in the United Kingdom: A retrospective analysis of practice data

Background

This study describes osteopathic practise activity, scope of practice and the osteopathic patient profile in order to understand the role osteopathy plays within the United Kingdom’s (UK) health system a decade after our previous survey.

Method

We used a retrospective questionnaire survey design to ask about osteopathic practice and audit patient case notes. All UK registered osteopaths were invited to participate in the survey. The survey was conducted using a web-based system. Each participating osteopath was asked about themselves, their practice and asked to randomly select and extract data from up to 8 random new patient health records during 2018. All patient related data were anonymised.

Results

The survey response rate was 500 osteopaths (9.4% of the profession) who provided information about 395 patients and 2,215 consultations. Most osteopaths were self-employed (81.1%; 344/424 responses) working alone either exclusively or often (63.9%; 237/371) and were able to offer 48.6% of patients an appointment within 3 days (184/379). Patient ages ranged from 1 month to 96 years (mean 44.7 years, Std Dev. 21.5), of these 58.4% (227/389) were female. Infants <1 years old represented 4.8% (18/379) of patients. The majority of patients presented with musculoskeletal complaints (81.0%; 306/378). Persistent complaints (present for more than 12 weeks before appointment) were the most common (67.9%; 256/377) and 41.7% (156/374) of patients had co-existing medical conditions. The most common treatment approaches used at the first appointment were soft-tissue techniques (73.9%; 292/395), articulatory techniques (69.4%; 274/395) and high velocity low amplitude thrust (34.4%; 136/395). The mean number of treatments per patient was 7 (mode 4).

Conclusion

Osteopaths predominantly provide care of musculoskeletal conditions, typically in private practice. To better understand the role of osteopathy in UK health service delivery, the profession needs to do more research with patients in order to understand their needs and their expected outcomes of care, and for this to inform osteopathic practice and education.

Efficacy and safety of osteopathic manipulative treatment: an overview of systematic reviews

OBJECTIVE

To summarise the available clinical evidence on the efficacy and safety of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) for different conditions.

DESIGN

Overview of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs). PROSPERO CRD42020170983.

DATA SOURCES

An electronic search was performed using seven databases: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, JBI, Prospero and Cochrane Library, from their inception until November 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

SRs and MAs of randomised controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of OMT for any condition were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The data were independently extracted by two authors. The AMSTAR-2 tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the SRs and MAs. The overview was conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.

RESULTS

The literature search revealed nine SRs or MAs conducted between 2013 and 2020 with 55 primary trials involving 3740 participants. The SRs reported a wide range of conditions including acute and chronic non-specific low back pain (NSLBP, four SRs), chronic non-specific neck pain (CNSNP, one SR), chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP, one SR), paediatric (one SR), neurological (primary headache, one SR) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS, one SR). Although with a different effect size and quality of evidence, MAs reported that OMT is more effective than comparators in reducing pain and improving functional status in acute/chronic NSLBP, CNSNP and CNCP. Due to small sample size, presence of conflicting results and high heterogeneity, questionable evidence existed on OMT efficacy for paediatric conditions, primary headache and IBS.No adverse events were reported in most SRs. According to AMSTAR-2, the methodological quality of the included SRs was rated low or critically low.

CONCLUSION

Based on the currently available SRs and MAs, promising evidence suggests the possible effectiveness of OMT for musculoskeletal disorders. Limited and inconclusive evidence occurs for paediatric conditions, primary headache and IBS. Further well-conducted SRs and MAs are needed to confirm and extend the efficacy and safety of OMT.

Do manual therapies have a specific autonomic effect? An overview of systematic reviews

Background

The impact of manual therapy interventions on the autonomic nervous system have been largely assessed, but with heterogeneous findings regarding the direction of these effects. We conducted an overview of systematic reviews to describe if there is a specific autonomic effect elicited by manual therapy interventions, its relation with the type of technique used and the body region where the intervention was applied.

Methods

We conducted an overview according to a publicly registered protocol. We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, EPISTEMONIKOS and SCOPUS, from their inception to march 2021. We included systematic reviews for which the primary aim of the intervention was to assess the autonomic effect elicited by a manual therapy intervention in either healthy or symptomatic individuals. Two authors independently applied the selection criteria, assessed risk of bias from the included reviews and extracted data. An established model of generalisation guided the data analysis and interpretation.

Results

We included 12 reviews (5 rated as low risk of bias according the ROBIS tool). The findings showed that manual therapies may have an effect on both sympathetic and parasympathetic systems. However, the results from included reviews were inconsistent due to differences in their methodological rigour and how the effects were measured. The reviews with a lower risk of bias could not discriminate the effects depending on the body region to which the technique was applied.

Conclusion

The magnitude of the specific autonomic effect elicited by manual therapies and its clinical relevance is uncertain. We point out some specific recommendations in order to improve the quality and relevance of future research in this field.

Osteopathic Medicine in Four Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain Diseases: An Observational Trial with Follow-Up

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain diseases (CMPDs) often use osteopathic medicine (OM), although the changes in patients with pain diseases are still insufficiently investigated. This study aimed to observe changes along and after OM in addition to routine care on pain, functioning, and quality of life in patients with four CMPDs.

METHODS

In this observational trial with follow-up, patients suffering from chronic neck pain (CNP, n = 10), chronic low back pain (CLBP, n = 10), chronic shoulder pain (CSP, n = 10), or chronic knee pain (CKP, n = 10) received up to six OM sessions in addition to routine care.

RESULTS

A total of 40 patients (73% female, mean age 47.7 ± 8.3 years, mean pain intensity 59.4 ± 12.5 mm, measured by a visual analog scale [VAS] 0-100 mm) were included. After 26 weeks, there was an improvement in the VAS pain score in the whole population (mean difference to baseline -33.1 mm [95% CI -40.5 to -25.7]), as well in the patients with the four diseases: CNP (-33.7 mm [-54.7 to -12.6]), CLBP (-28.2 mm [-47.9 to -8.4]), CSP (-32.4 [-46.8 to -18.0]), and CKP (-38.1 mm [-49.1 to -27.0]). Regarding disease-specific outcomes, we found improvements in CNP, as measured by the neck disability index (scale 0-50; mean difference -3.6 [-9.0 to 1.9]), CLBP, as measured by the low back pain rating scale (scale 0-60; -3.4 [-12.5 to 5.7]), CSP, as measured by the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand score (scale 0-100; -13.4 [-23.1 to -3.7]), and CKP, as measured by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (scale 0-96; -13.0 [-23.5 to -2.5]). These improvements persisted through week 52. No adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSION

The study observed beneficial changes along and after the OM treatment in addition to routine care in patients with four different CMPDs. High-quality, multicenter randomized controlled trials are strongly needed to compare the effectiveness of OM and standard care interventions in treating CMPDs in the future. We have provided sufficient data for sample size calculations for these trials.

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.

Patient reported outcomes in a large cohort of patients receiving osteopathic care in the United Kingdom

OBJECTIVE

The use of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) to evaluate care is being advocated increasingly in clinical settings. Electronic data capture is both resource and environmentally friendly and convenient. This purpose of this study was to test and implement a nationwide system to collect routine PROM data from osteopathic patients using a web and mobile app.

METHODS

A prospective study design was used to monitor outcomes of care for patients attending osteopathic clinics. Demographic and service data were collected, the primary outcomes were the Bournemouth Questionnaire and a Global Rating of Change score. Data concerning patients' satisfaction and experience of care were collected also. Data were collected at baseline, one week, and six weeks post-treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 1721 patients completed the PROM app questionnaire. The majority (65.8%) of patients who used the PROM app were between 40 and 69 years old with 11% being 70 years and over. At baseline 39.8% of patients reported they'd had their symptoms for 13 weeks or more. Low back pain was the most common symptom (55.8%). Patients reported high scores for both satisfaction and experience of osteopathic care: 88.1% were very satisfied at six weeks post-baseline and 93.5% reported very good experience at six weeks post-baseline. Data from the Global Rating of Change scale indicated that at one week post-baseline 89.1% of patients reported some measure of improvement, and at six weeks this figure rose to 92.8%. The mean sum score for the Bournemouth Questionnaire went from 30.8 at baseline to 13.3 at six weeks post-baseline. This represented a significant and clinically meaningful positive change score of 56.8%.

CONCLUSION

The app was well-completed and the data very encouraging. These data will help to form the basis for standards of care for patients attending osteopathic practices.

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.

What Makes an Osteopathic Treatment Effective From a Patient's Perspective: A Descriptive Phenomenological Study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to describe patients' perspectives on their experience in osteopathic treatment, to contribute toward developing interpretative models on effectiveness.

METHODS

A descriptive phenomenological approach was used. The data were collected through a semistructured interview. To capture the variability of the phenomenon, a purposive sample of 12 participants with previous experience of osteopathic care was selected. The data analysis was carried out in an inductive way, and it was parallel to the recruitment to continuously monitor the data saturation.

RESULTS

Data saturation was reached with 12 participants (female = 9; male = 3). Participants' age ranged from 27 to 82 years old (mean: 55.25 ± 17.15; median: 59; kurtosis: -0.82). Participants had different reasons for consultation. The analysis showed 1 overarching theme, "Osteopathy is a path of awareness," 3 themes, and 12 categories. Themes were: (1) "The experience of pain produces awareness of the need for care," (2) "Osteopathy is a journey to be shared over time," and (3) "The effectiveness of the osteopathic treatment is the discovery of the person's unity by experience."

CONCLUSION

Participants affirm that osteopathy is a path of awareness that starts from an experience of pain; leads them to contact an osteopath; and ends with their experience of the unity of body, mind, and spirit.

"If you don't use or understand visceral osteopathy you're not a real osteopath": Professional identity in Australian osteopathy through the lens of a single traditional technique

BACKGROUND/CONTEXT

Manual therapists utilise a range of techniques in the clinical practice to manage predominantly musculoskeletal complaints. There are, however, a number of practitioners who utilise techniques that are directed towards the bodies' visceral structures. Osteopaths are one such professional group that utilise these techniques in their practice. Like many health professions, the identity of the osteopathy profession is evolving, and the techniques osteopaths use form part of this identity.

OBJECTIVE

Explore free text responses to a questionnaire about the use of techniques directed towards the viscera.

METHODS/DESIGN

Australian osteopaths who were part of a practice-based research network, were invited to complete a survey about their use of techniques applied to the viscera. Participants were also invited to provide free-text responses to a number of items related to the use of these techniques. Free-text responses were thematically analysed.

PARTICIPANTS

137 participants completed the survey.

RESULTS

Three themes were identified: being an osteopath; applying visceral techniques in practice - evidence conflicts with practice; and, inadequate education in visceral techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

Participant responses resonated with the internal (own world views, beliefs) and external (external perceptions of the profession, education) influences that underpin the theory of a professions' identity. Our work demonstrates that the Australian osteopathy profession exhibits an identity similar to other manual therapies - the profession is somewhat fragmented in its views about its practice. Additional research is required to explore whether other manual therapy techniques used by osteopaths elicit similar responses and how those external to the profession perceive it.

The Italian Osteopathic Practitioners Estimates and RAtes (OPERA) study: How osteopaths work

The scope of practice of the osteopathic profession in Italy is underreported. The first part of the present study investigated the Italian osteopaths' profile, focusing on the socio-demographic information and geographical distribution together with the main characteristics of their education. The OPERA-IT study highlighted that the majority of respondents declared to work as sole practitioners (58.4%), while the remaining declared to work as part of a team. Since teamwork and networking are recognized as fundamental aspects of healthcare, the present study aims to compare the osteopathic practice, diagnostic and treatment modalities of osteopaths who work as a sole practitioner and osteopaths who work as part of a team to highlight possible differences. Moreover, patients' characteristics will be presented. The OPERA-IT study population was chosen to provide a representative sample. A web campaign was set up to inform the Italian osteopaths before the beginning of the study. The OPERA IT study used a previously tested questionnaire. The questionnaire was translated into Italian following the World Health Organization recommendation. The questionnaire was composed of 57 items grouped in five sections, namely: socio-demographics, osteopathic education and training, working profile, organization, and management of the clinical practice and patient profile. The survey was delivered online through a dedicated platform. The survey was completed by 4,816 individuals. Osteopaths who work as sole practitioners represented the majority of the sample (n = 2814; 58.4%). Osteopaths who work as part of a team declared to collaborate mostly with physiotherapists (n = 1121; 23.3%), physicians with speciality (n = 1040; 21.6%), and other osteopaths (n = 943; 19.6%). The two groups showed heterogeneous characteristics. Significative differences were observed in all the factors, namely: geographical distribution, age, gender, training, working contract and working place, daily consultations and time for each consultation, fees, and the average waiting period to book an appointment. The principal component analysis supported a ten-component model and explained 80.5% of the total variance. The analysis showed that osteopaths working as sole practitioners have an increased probability (OR = 0.91; CI 95%: 0.88-0.94; p<0.01) of using systemic diagnostic and treatment techniques and have distinct clinical features with higher probability (OR = 0.92; 0.88-0.96; p<0.01) of spending less time with patients, being paid less but treating a higher number of patients per week. The most represented patients' age groups were 41-64 years old (n = 4452; 92.4%) and 21-40 years old (n = 4291; 89.1%). Similarly, the most reported new patients' age groups were 41-64 years old (n = 4221; 87.7%) and 21-40 years old (n = 3364; 69.9%). The most common presenting complaints were back pain, neck pain, cervical radiculopathy, sciatica, shoulder pain, and headaches. Osteopathic practice in Italy seems to be characterised by interprofessional collaboration, mostly with physiotherapists. Our results highlighted two different profiles in terms of sociodemographic characteristics and work modalities between osteopaths who work as sole practitioners and those who work as part of a team. Although according to the respondents, people of all ages consult Italian osteopaths, the majority of patients are adults. Most of them have been referred to osteopathy by other patients or acquaintances. Patients seek osteopathic care mostly for musculoskeletal related complaints.

The Spanish Osteopathic Practitioners Estimates and RAtes (OPERA) study: A cross-sectional survey

Background

Despite the growth of the osteopathic profession in Spain in the last few years, reliable information regarding professional profile and prevalence is still lacking. The Osteopathic Practitioners Estimates and RAtes (OPERA) project was developed as a European-based survey dedicated to profiling the osteopathic profession across Europe. The present study aims to describe the characteristics of osteopathic practitioners, their professional profile and the features of their clinical practice.

Methods

A voluntary, validated online-based survey was distributed across Spain between January and May 2018. The survey, composed of 54 questions and 5 sections, was formally translated from English to Spanish and adapted from the original version. Because there is not a unique representative osteopathic professional body in Spain, a dedicated website was created for this study, and participation was encouraged through both specific agreements with national registers/associations and an e-based campaign.

Results

A total of 517 osteopaths participated in the study, of which 310 were male (60%). The majority of respondents were aged between 30–39 years (53%) and 98% had an academic degree, mainly in physiotherapy. Eighty-five per cent of the respondents completed a minimum of four-year part-time course in osteopathy. Eighty-nine per cent of the participants were self-employed. Fifty-eight per cent of them own their clinic, and 40% declared to work as sole practitioner. Thirty-one per cent see an average of 21 to 30 patients per week for 46–60 minutes each. The most commonly used diagnostic techniques are movement assessment, palpation of structures/position and assessment of tenderness and trigger points. Regarding treatment modalities, articulatory/mobilisation techniques followed by visceral techniques and progressive inhibition of neuromuscular structures is often to always used. The majority of patients estimated by the respondents sought osteopathic treatment for musculoskeletal problems mainly localised on the lumbar and cervical region. The majority of respondents manifest a robust professional identity and a collective desire to be regulated as a healthcare profession.

Conclusions

This study represents the first published document to determine the characteristics of the osteopathic practitioners in Spain using large, national data. To date, it represents the most informative document related to the osteopathic community in Spain. It brings new information on where, how, and by whom osteopathy is practised in the country. The information provided could potentially influence the development of the profession in Spain.

Osteopathy in the French-speaking part of Switzerland: Practitioners' profile and scope of back pain management

Background

Osteopathy is commonly used for spinal pain, but knowledge about back pain management by osteopaths is scarce.

Objective

The aim of this study was to survey osteopaths across the French-speaking part of Switzerland about the scope of their practice and their management of patients with back pain.

Design

This cross-sectional observational study was based on an online survey conducted from March to June 2017. Setting and participants: All registered osteopaths of the French-speaking part of Switzerland were asked to complete the survey. Outcome measures: In addition to descriptive statistics (practice characteristics, patients’ profiles, scope of treatment modalities, health promotion, research, and osteopathic practice), we explored variables associated with osteopaths’ practice, such as age and gender.

Results

A total of 241 osteopaths completed the questionnaire (response rate: 28.8%). Almost two thirds of osteopaths were female. Ages ranged from 25 to 72 years with an overall mean of 42.0 (SD 10.7) years. Male osteopaths reported more weekly working hours than female osteopaths did (38.2 [SD 11.0] vs 31.6 [SD 8.9], respectively, p<0.001). Almost a third (27.8%,) of osteopaths could arrange an appointment for acute conditions on the same day and 62.0% within a week. Acute or subacute spinal conditions, mainly low back and neck pain, were the most frequent conditions seen by our respondents. For 94.4% of osteopaths, one to three consultations were required for the management of such conditions.

Conclusion

Osteopaths play a role in the management of spinal conditions, especially for acute problems. These findings, combined with short waiting times for consultations for acute conditions, as well as prompt management capabilities for acute low back and acute neck pain, support the view that the osteopathic profession constitutes an added value to primary care.

Determinants of health, health behaviours and demographic profile of patients attending an Australian university student-led osteopathy clinic

Background

Profiles of health professions practice can inform pre-professional education, provide evidence to assist with interprofessional practice, and inform policy development. An understanding of the profile of patients seeking osteopathy care is emerging. Current research suggests that musculoskeletal presentations predominate with approximately one-third of patients presenting with co-morbid diseases. There is little data on these presentations in Australian osteopathy practice. This study aimed to describe the patient demographics, clinical presentations, health behaviours and determinants of health, including health literacy, of those attending for care at an Australian student-led osteopathy clinic.

Methods

A convenience sample design was utilised where consecutive patients presenting for their initial consultation were invited to complete a health information questionnaire during 2016–2017. The questionnaire explored a range of health behaviours and the patient’s health status. Data from the clinical records were also extracted to establish the presenting complaint, duration of the complaint and pertinent demographics. Descriptive statistics were generated for each variable.

Results

Data were available for 1617 patients presenting for their initial consultation. The mean age of patients was 33.7 (±13.1) years with 55% (n = 887) identifying as female. Acute presentations predominated (n = 840, 52%), with presentations affecting the spine being the most common (57.8%). Most patients rated their health status as good to very good (75%). Approximately 7.5% of patients were identified as having low health literacy and 55.9% were currently suffering from one or more co-morbid presentations.

Conclusions

The demographic profile and presenting complaints of patients presenting to a student-led osteopathy clinic are largely consistent with other Australian private practice profiles. The current work also identified co-morbid presentations, and positive and negative health behaviours. Osteopaths may play a role in the management of, or referral for, these presentations where health behaviours require change, or management of co-morbid conditions is beyond the scope of practice. The increasing volume of patient profile literature globally suggests that osteopaths can play a substantial role in the management of musculoskeletal complaints. Further, osteopathy may play a role in screening determinants of health, and engage in multidisciplinary care to ensure those patients with co-morbid conditions or adverse health behaviours are managed appropriately.

Characteristics of complementary medicine therapists in Switzerland: A cross-sectional study

Objective

More than 27,000 complementary medicine (CM) therapists are registered in Switzerland, but limited data are available on their occupational profile and role in the healthcare system. Herein we aimed to gain a better understanding of the professional profile of non-physician licensed therapists, focusing on acupuncture, osteopathy, and European naturopathy.

Design

This cross-sectional study was based on an online anonymous survey conducted from March to June 2017.

Setting and participants

All 1549 non-physician registered osteopaths, acupuncturists, and naturopaths in the French-speaking part of Switzerland were asked to complete the survey.

Main outcome measures

We measured the therapists’ demographics, training and practice characteristics, and workload.

Results

A total of 426 therapists returned the questionnaire (response rate: 27.5%). The mean age of the respondents was 46.0 years (SD 11.6) and most were women (67.8%). CM represented the main professional activity for a majority of therapists (82.8%), most of whom were independent (86.3%). The length and number of consultations per month varied across professions. Multivariate analysis showed that acupuncturists and naturopaths performed significantly fewer consults per month than osteopaths did. However, consultation length was significantly longer for acupuncturists and naturopaths than for osteopaths. Acupuncturists (71.6%) and naturopaths (64.4%) were significantly more favorable than osteopaths (27.7%) to have consultation costs covered by basic health insurance. Professional profiles differed between osteopaths, on the one hand, and naturopaths and acupuncturists, on the other, mainly regarding workload, treatment duration, and main reasons to consult.

Conclusions

This first study to investigate a variety of therapist profiles in Switzerland provides useful information about their activities and role within the Swiss healthcare system. Although all three professions are encompassed under the same umbrella term (CM), our study showed that they have specific work cultures and areas of intervention in the healthcare system.

Shared decision making by United Kingdom osteopathic students: an observational study using the OPTION-12 instrument

Background

At the crux of patient centred care is Shared Decision Making (SDM), which benefits patient and practitioner. Despite external pressures, studies indicate that SDM remains poorly practised across a variety of healthcare professions. The degree of SDM engagement within United Kingdom osteopathic undergraduate teaching clinics is currently unknown.

Methods

In 2014 we used the reliable and validated OPTION-12 (O12) instrument to calculate a score that reflected the degree of SDM utility in one United Kingdom Osteopathic Educational Institute’s teaching clinic. We also aimed to compare these scores with those previously obtained for physiotherapists working within the United Kingdom’s National Health Service. Student-patient initial and follow-up encounters were audio recorded, transcribed and scored using the O12. Comparisons between the following O12 scores were performed: the Osteopathic Educational Institute’s 4th and 3rd year students; the Osteopathic Educational Institute’s student’s initial and follow-up patient encounters; the Osteopathic Educational Institute’s students and National Health Service physiotherapists.

Results

We analysed 35.5 h of transcribed data from 30 student-patient encounters (7 initial: 23 follow-up). An O12 score of 0.6% (range 0–10.4%) was calculated. No significant differences were found between year groups or encounter types. Significant differences were found compared to National Health Service physiotherapist (score = 24.4%): (U = 144, z = 4.25, p < 0.0005); although both scores are below the 60% threshold for competent SDM behaviour.

Conclusions

Undergraduate osteopaths did not appear to engage in competent SDM behaviours, implying traditional and paternalistic styles of decision making that align with results from other manual therapy professions. Students in this study did not practise competent SDM behaviours. Effective educational strategies are required to ensure SDM behaviours reach competent levels.

An investigation of Australian osteopaths' attitudes, skills and utilisation of evidence-based practice: a national cross-sectional survey

Background

Osteopaths are an integral member of the health care team, playing a pivotal role in the provision of care for patients with musculoskeletal disorders. Osteopaths, like other health care providers, are under increasing pressure to deliver evidence-based health care and to improve patient outcomes. However, the extent to which osteopaths engage in evidence-based practice (EBP), particularly in Australia, is not well understood. This study therefore set out to investigate the attitudes, skills and use of EBP, and perceived barriers and enablers of EBP uptake, among osteopaths practicing in Australia.

Methods

National cross-sectional survey of Australian registered osteopaths. Eligible participants were invited by email and other digital media recruitment strategies to complete the online Evidence-Based Practice Attitude and Utilisation Survey (EBASE).

Results

A total of 332 osteopaths completed the survey. The demographic characteristics of respondents were generally consistent with the characteristics of the Australian osteopathy workforce. The respondents were mostly favourable of EBP, with the majority agreeing or strongly agreeing that EBP assists in making decisions about patient care (86.7%) and improves the quality of patient care (75.6%). While most respondents (88.3%) had some training in EBP, most reported a moderate level of perceived skill in EBP. The majority of respondents engaged infrequently (0–5 times) in EBP activities within the last month, and most indicated that a very small or small proportion of their clinical practice was based on clinical research evidence. Leading barriers to the uptake of EBP were lack of time and lack of clinical evidence in osteopathy. Key enablers of EBP uptake were access to the internet and online databases at work, and access to full-text articles and EBP education materials.

Conclusions

Osteopaths participating in the survey were largely supportive of evidence-based practice, yet engaged infrequently in EBP activities. An important next step in this research is to identify suitable strategies that effectively improve EBP uptake in osteopathy, and perchance, improve patient outcomes.

Attitudes, skills and use of evidence-based practice among UK osteopaths: a national cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is a clinical decision-making framework that supports quality improvement in healthcare. While osteopaths are key providers of musculoskeletal healthcare, the extent to which osteopaths engage in EBP is unclear. Thus, the aim of this cross-sectional study was to investigate UK osteopaths' attitudes, skills and use of EBP, and perceived barriers and facilitators of EBP uptake.

METHODS

UK-registered osteopaths were invited to complete the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude and Utilisation Survey (EBASE) online.

RESULTS

Of the 5200 registered osteopaths in the UK, 9.9% (517/5200) responded to the invitation, and 7.2% (375/5200) completed the EBASE (< 20% incomplete answers). The demographic characteristics of the survey sample were largely similar to those of the UK osteopathy workforce. The osteopaths reported overall positive attitudes towards EBP, with most agreeing that EBP improves the quality of patient care (69.3%) and is necessary for osteopathy practice (76.5%). The majority reported moderate-level skills in EBP, and most (80.8%) were interested in improving these skills. Participating osteopaths typically engaged in EBP activities 1-5 times over the last month. Barriers to EBP uptake included a lack of time and clinical evidence in osteopathy. Main facilitators of EBP included having access to online databases, internet at work, full-text articles, and EBP education materials.

CONCLUSIONS

UK osteopaths were generally supportive of evidence-based practice, had moderate-level skills in EBP and engaged in EBP activities infrequently. The development of effective interventions that improve osteopaths' skills and the incorporation of EBP into clinical practice should be the focus of future research.

Responsiveness, Reliability, and Minimally Important and Minimal Detectable Changes of 3 Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Low Back Pain: Validation Study

Background

The Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), visual analog scale (VAS) of pain intensity, and numerical rating scale (NRS) are among the most commonly used outcome measures in trials of interventions for low back pain. Their use in paper form is well established. Few data are available on the metric properties of electronic counterparts.

Objective

The goal of our research was to establish responsiveness, minimally important change (MIC) thresholds, reliability, and minimal detectable change at a 95% level (MDC₉₅) for electronic versions of the RMDQ, VAS, and NRS as delivered via iOS and Android apps and Web browser.

Methods

We recruited adults with low back pain who visited osteopaths. We invited participants to complete the eRMDQ, eVAS, and eNRS at baseline, 1 week, and 6 weeks along with a health transition question at 1 and 6 weeks. Data from participants reporting recovery were used in MIC and responsiveness analyses using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves and areas under the ROC curves (AUCs). Data from participants reporting stability were used for analyses of reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] agreement) and MDC₉₅.

Results

We included 442 participants. At 1 and 6 weeks, ROC AUCs were 0.69 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.80) and 0.67 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.87) for the eRMDQ, 0.69 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.80) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.95) for the eVAS, and 0.73 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.80) and 0.81 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.92) for the eNRS, respectively. Associated MIC thresholds were estimated as 1 (0 to 2) and 2 (–1 to 5), 13 (9 to 17) and 7 (–12 to 26), and 2 (1 to 3) and 1 (0 to 2) points, respectively. Over a 1-week period in participants categorized as “stable” and “about the same” using the transition question, ICCs were 0.87 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.95) and 0.84 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.91) for the eRMDQ with MDC₉₅ of 4 and 5, 0.31 (95% CI –0.25 to 0.71) and 0.61 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.77) for the eVAS with MDC₉₅ of 39 and 34, and 0.52 (95% CI 0.14 to 0.77) to 0.67 (95% CI 0.51 to 0.78) with MDC₉₅ of 4 and 3 for the eNRS.

Conclusions

The eRMDQ was reliable with borderline adequate responsiveness. The eNRS was responsive with borderline reliability. While the eVAS had adequate responsiveness, it did not have an attractive reliability profile. Thus, the eNRS might be preferred over the eVAS for measuring pain intensity. The observed electronic outcome measures’ metric properties are within the ranges of values reported in the literature for their paper counterparts and are adequate for measuring changes in a low back pain population.

The role of osteopathy in the Swiss primary health care system: a practice review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to describe osteopathic activity and scope of practice to understand the current and future role of osteopathy in the Swiss healthcare system.

DESIGN

A questionnaire survey that included a patient record-based retrospective clinical audit.

SETTING/POPULATION

Osteopaths with a national diploma (n=1086) were invited by mail to participate in an online survey. Osteopathic assistants (n=84) were identified through their national association.

QUESTIONNAIRE

The survey was constructed from previous surveys and tested for face validity with experts, osteopaths and patient representatives. The questionnaires were completed online in English, German and French between April and August 2017. Osteopaths anonymously reported information about themselves, their practice, and the treatment and care for four randomly selected patients they managed in 2016.

RESULTS

The response rate from the survey was 44.5% (521/1171). Data on osteopathic care were collected for 1144 patients and 3449 consultations. In 2016, osteopaths saw approximately 6.8% of the Swiss population for 1700 000 consultations and an overall estimated cost of 200 million Swiss francs. 76% of patients sought care directly without a referral from another care provider. Few osteopaths (<1%) work in a hospital setting and 46% work in isolation in private practice. Infants (under 2 years old) made up 10% of all patients and 9% of patients were ≥65 years. Patients most commonly sought treatment for musculoskeletal conditions (81%) with the spine being the most frequent location (66%). Treatments also included exercise advice (34.2%) and lifestyle management (35.4%). Fewer than 1 patient out of 10 were referred to another health profession or provider.

CONCLUSIONS

In Switzerland, osteopathic care represents an important first line management for musculoskeletal conditions that alleviates some of the burden of care in the Swiss primary healthcare system.

A workforce survey of Australian osteopathy: analysis of a nationally-representative sample of osteopaths from the Osteopathy Research and Innovation Network (ORION) project

Background

Limited information is available regarding the profile and clinical practice characteristics of the osteopathy workforce in Australia. This paper reports such information by analysing data from a nationally-representative sample of Australian osteopaths.

Methods

Data was obtained from a workforce survey of Australian osteopathy, investigating the characteristics of the practitioner, their practice, clinical management features and perceptions regarding research. The survey questionnaire was distributed to all registered osteopaths across Australia in 2016 as part of the Osteopathy Research and Innovation Network (ORION) project.

Results

A total of 992 Australian osteopaths participated in this study representing a response rate of 49.1%. The average age of the participants was 38.0 years with 58.1% being female and the majority holding a Bachelor or higher degree qualification related to the osteopathy professional. Approximately 80.0% of the osteopaths were practicing in an urban area, with most osteopaths working in multi-practitioner locations, having referral relationships with a range of health care practitioners, managing patients a number of musculoskeletal disorders, and providing multi-model treatment options.

Conclusions

A total of 3.9 million patients were estimated to consult with osteopaths every year and an average of approximate 3.0 million hours were spent delivering osteopathy services per year. Further research is required to provide rich, in-depth examination regarding a range of osteopathy workforce issues which will help ensure safe, effective patient care to all receiving and providing treatments as part of the broader Australian health system.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3158-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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.

The patient experience of osteopathic healthcare

BACKGROUND

Osteopathy in Australia is a primary care limited scope practice. Practitioner surveys suggest that patients present with chronic pain and receive manual therapies, exercise and lifestyle advice. Further research is required to deepen the understanding of this intervention from the perspective of patients.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the experience of patients receiving osteopathic healthcare.

DESIGN

Mixed methodology.

METHOD

A quantitative survey of a convenience sample of patients was followed by qualitative semi-structured interviews in a purposive sample of respondents with chronic non-specific low back pain. The transcripts were analysed using a phenomenological approach.

RESULTS

The survey results suggested directions of enquiry for the interviews. Eleven subjects were interviewed and reported commonalities in their clinical histories with multisystem co-morbidities. Four themes became apparent: patient decision-making, patient shared experiences of the osteopathic healthcare consultation, tailored patient-centred care, and therapeutic relationship in healthcare.

CONCLUSION

This data suggests that patients experience osteopathic healthcare after trying other disciplines; that there are shared aspects of the consultations, with a thorough assessment, education about their condition, multiple manual therapies and lifestyle advice; that the experience is patient-centred and tailored to their context; and that the therapeutic relationship is a key aspect of the experience. These results reflect a number of aspects of osteopathic healthcare from workplace surveys.

Primary reasons for osteopathic consultation: a prospective survey in Quebec

BACKGROUND

Osteopathy is an increasingly popular health care modality to address pain and function in the musculoskeletal system, organs and the head region, as well as functional somatic syndromes. Although osteopathy is recommended principally in guidelines for management of back pain, osteopaths' scope of practice is wide, albeit poorly defined. In order to understand better the practice of osteopathy, this study aimed to investigate the most common reasons for osteopathic consultations in clinical settings in Quebec.

METHODS

A prospective survey of members of the Registre des ostéopathes du Québec was conducted to examine demographics in osteopathic practices, as well as patients' primary reasons for consultations over a two-week period. The questionnaire was devised following a literature review and refined and verified with two stages of expert input.

RESULTS

277 osteopaths (60[corrected]% response rate) responded to the survey notice. 14,002 patients' primary reasons for consultations were reported in completed questionnaires and returned by practicing osteopaths. Musculoskeletal pain located in the spine, thorax, pelvis and limbs was the most common reason for consultations (61.9%), with females consulting most commonly for cervical pain and males for lumbar pain. Perinatal and paediatric (11.8%), head (9.1%), visceral (5.0%) and general concerns (4.8%) were the other most common reasons for consultations. Preventive care represented the remaining 0.3%.

INTERPRETATION

The nature of primary reasons for osteopathic consultations, coupled with documented satisfaction of patients with this approach, suggest a future for multidisciplinary collaborative health care including osteopathy. Results of this survey may contribute to informing physicians and others pending regulation of Quebec osteopaths, and also provide direction for future clinical research and guidelines development.

Osteopathic manipulative treatment for nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nonspecific back pain is common, disabling, and costly. Therefore, we assessed effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) in the management of nonspecific low back pain (LBP) regarding pain and functional status.

METHODS

A systematic literature search unrestricted by language was performed in October 2013 in electronic and ongoing trials databases. Searches of reference lists and personal communications identified additional studies. Only randomized clinical trials were included; specific back pain or single treatment techniques studies were excluded. Outcomes were pain and functional status. Studies were independently reviewed using a standardized form. The mean difference (MD) or standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and overall effect size were calculated at 3 months posttreatment. GRADE was used to assess quality of evidence.

RESULTS

We identified 307 studies. Thirty-one were evaluated and 16 excluded. Of the 15 studies reviewed, 10 investigated effectiveness of OMT for nonspecific LBP, 3 effect of OMT for LBP in pregnant women, and 2 effect of OMT for LBP in postpartum women. Twelve had a low risk of bias. Moderate-quality evidence suggested OMT had a significant effect on pain relief (MD, -12.91; 95% CI, -20.00 to -5.82) and functional status (SMD, -0.36; 95% CI, -0.58 to -0.14) in acute and chronic nonspecific LBP. In chronic nonspecific LBP, moderate-quality evidence suggested a significant difference in favour of OMT regarding pain (MD, -14.93; 95% CI, -25.18 to -4.68) and functional status (SMD, -0.32; 95% CI, -0.58 to -0.07). For nonspecific LBP in pregnancy, low-quality evidence suggested a significant difference in favour of OMT for pain (MD, -23.01; 95% CI, -44.13 to -1.88) and functional status (SMD, -0.80; 95% CI, -1.36 to -0.23), whereas moderate-quality evidence suggested a significant difference in favour of OMT for pain (MD, -41.85; 95% CI, -49.43 to -34.27) and functional status (SMD, -1.78; 95% CI, -2.21 to -1.35) in nonspecific LBP postpartum.

CONCLUSION

Clinically relevant effects of OMT were found for reducing pain and improving functional status in patients with acute and chronic nonspecific LBP and for LBP in pregnant and postpartum women at 3 months posttreatment. However, larger, high-quality randomized controlled trials with robust comparison groups are recommended.