Osteopathic care for spinal complaints: A systematic literature review

The Out-of-pocket Expenses of People With Tinnitus in Europe

BACKGROUND

Despite the high frequency of tinnitus and its impact on wellbeing, little is known about its economic burden, and, to our knowledge, no data are available on out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses.

METHODS

In 2022, a survey was conducted on OOP costs of tinnitus. We enrolled 679 participants with slight, moderate, and severe tinnitus in Italy, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Germany, and Spain. We estimated annual OOP expenses for tinnitus-related healthcare visits, treatments, medications, and alternative medicine practices. Prevalence of tinnitus in the general population, obtained from a representative survey we conducted in Europe in 2017-2018, was used to generalize costs for people with any tinnitus at the national level.

RESULTS

OOP expenses were 368€ (95% confidence intervals [CI], 78€-690€), 728€ (95% CI, 316€-1,288€), and 1,492€ (95% CI, 760€-2,688€) for slight, moderate, and severe tinnitus, respectively, with annual expenditure of 565€ for people with any tinnitus: 209€ for healthcare visits; 93€ for treatments; 16€ for drugs; 64€ for hearing supporting systems; and 183€ for acupuncture, homeopathy, and osteopathy. Individuals with slight, moderate, and severe tinnitus expressed a willingness to invest 1.6, 4.3, and 7.0 times their monthly income, respectively, to achieve complete relief from tinnitus.

CONCLUSION

This study offers for the first time insights into the OOP expenses incurred by individuals with tinnitus. OOP expenses exhibited substantial variations based on severity status, accounting for more than 17 billion € in the countries considered. In terms of financial burden, these findings align tinnitus to the recognized leading disabilities, including back pain and migraine.

Effect of osteopathic techniques on human resting muscle tone in healthy subjects using myotonometry: a factorial randomized trial

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are highly prevalent, burdensome, and putatively associated with an altered human resting muscle tone (HRMT). Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is commonly and effectively applied to treat MSDs and reputedly influences the HRMT. Arguably, OMT may modulate alterations in HRMT underlying MSDs. However, there is sparse evidence even for the effect of OMT on HRMT in healthy subjects. A 3 × 3 factorial randomised trial was performed to investigate the effect of myofascial release (MRT), muscle energy (MET), and soft tissue techniques (STT) on the HRMT of the corrugator supercilii (CS), superficial masseter (SM), and upper trapezius muscles (UT) in healthy subjects in Hamburg, Germany. Participants were randomised into three groups (1:1:1 allocation ratio) receiving treatment, according to different muscle-technique pairings, over the course of three sessions with one-week washout periods. We assessed the effect of osteopathic techniques on muscle tone (F), biomechanical (S, D), and viscoelastic properties (R, C) from baseline to follow-up (primary objective) and tested if specific muscle-technique pairs modulate the effect pre- to post-intervention (secondary objective) using the MyotonPRO (at rest). Ancillary, we investigate if these putative effects may differ between the sexes. Data were analysed using descriptive (mean, standard deviation, and quantiles) and inductive statistics (Bayesian ANOVA). 59 healthy participants were randomised into three groups and two subjects dropped out from one group (n = 20; n = 20; n = 19-2). The CS produced frequent measurement errors and was excluded from analysis. OMT significantly changed F (-0.163 [0.060]; p = 0.008), S (-3.060 [1.563]; p = 0.048), R (0.594 [0.141]; p < 0.001), and C (0.038 [0.017]; p = 0.028) but not D (0.011 [0.017]; p = 0.527). The effect was not significantly modulated by muscle-technique pairings (p > 0.05). Subgroup analysis revealed a significant sex-specific difference for F from baseline to follow-up. No adverse events were reported. OMT modified the HRMT in healthy subjects which may inform future research on MSDs. In detail, MRT, MET, and STT reduced the muscle tone (F), decreased biomechanical (S not D), and increased viscoelastic properties (R and C) of the SM and UT (CS was not measurable). However, the effect on HRMT was not modulated by muscle-technique interaction and showed sex-specific differences only for F.Trial registration German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS00020393).

Mindful Walking in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Aim:

The objective of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of a mindful walking program (MWP) in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP).

Methods:

The trial was a two-armed, randomized, controlled single-center open clinical trial. The study was performed in the Outpatient Clinic for Integrative Medicine of the Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin. The participants were adults aged 18–65 years with CLBP (≥3 months) and an average low back pain within the past 7 days measured on a visual analog scale (VAS, 0 = no pain, 100 = worst imaginable pain) of at least 40 mm. The patients received either eight weekly MWP sessions or no intervention (control). The primary outcome was the perceived pain intensity assessed with a VAS (0–100 mm) after 8 weeks. The secondary outcomes included back function assessed by the Hannover Functional Questionnaire Backache (FFbH-R) and perceived stress assessed by the 14-item Cohen's Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-14). The results were obtained by analysis of covariance adjusted for the respective baseline values.

Results:

In total, 55 patients were randomized (MWP: n = 29, 82.8% female, mean (±standard deviation) age: 52.5 ± 8.6 years, pain: 56.4 ± 14.1 mm; control: n = 26, 84.6% female, 54.8 ± 7.5 years, pain: 55.4 ± 13.1 mm). After 8 weeks, compared with the control conditions, the MWP was not associated with a statistically significant benefit for pain (VAS), adjusted mean − 9.6 [−22.3 to 3.1], p = 0.136, clinical benefits for back function (FFbH-R), adjusted mean 2.2 [−4.2 to 8.6], p = 0.493, or stress (PSS-14), adjusted mean − 1.6 [−4.8 to 1.6], p = 0.326.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, compared with no intervention, mindful walking did not significantly improve pain, back function, or perceived stress in patients with CLBP.

Clinical Trial registration:

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01893073).

Safety of Chuna Manipulation Therapy in 289,953 Patients with Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Retrospective Study

Studies have reported that mild adverse events (AEs) are common after manual therapy and that there is a risk of serious injury. We aimed to assess the safety of Chuna manipulation therapy (CMT), a traditional manual Korean therapy, by analysing AEs in patients who underwent this treatment. Patients who received at least one session of CMT between December 2009 and March 2019 at 14 Korean medicine hospitals were included. Electronic patient charts and internal audit data obtained from situation report logs were retrospectively analysed. All data were reviewed by two researchers. The inter-rater agreement was assessed using the Cohen’s kappa coefficient, and reliability analysis among hospitals was assessed using Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient. In total, 2,682,258 CMT procedures were performed in 289,953 patients during the study period. There were 50 AEs, including worsened pain (n = 29), rib fracture (n = 11), falls during treatment (n = 6), chest pain (n = 2), dizziness (n = 1), and unpleasant feeling (n = 1). The incidence of mild to moderate AEs was 1.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36–2.39) per 100,000 treatment sessions, and that of severe AEs was 0.04 (95% CI 0.00–0.16) per 100,000 treatment sessions. Thus, AEs of any level of severity were very rare after CMT. Moreover, there were no instances of carotid artery dissection or spinal cord injury, which are the most severe AEs associated with manual therapy in other countries.

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 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 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.