Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Manipulation, Osteopathic”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1996

Preliminary findings on the use of osteopathic manipulative treatment by osteopathic physicians.

The literature suggests that the extent to which osteopathic physicians actually use osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) and the factors that predict the use of OMT remain virtually unexplored. A mailed survey of practicing osteopathic physicians was used to query respondents about their use of OMT and about the effects of a number of factors on use of OMT. The survey showed that 71% of 100 practicing physicians used OMT with 5% or more of their patients, and 14% in 50% or more of their patients. Multivariate statistical procedures revealed that a physician's having learned a new OMT format since graduation from medical school was the primary predictor of the use of OMT, followed by interest in OMT during internship. The other predictor was whether the respondent had a family member who was also a DO. Physician's specialty, emphasis on OMT during graduate and postgraduate training, and the era during which DOs received their training were not significant predictors of OMT use. These results indicate a need for further research on OMT use and the variables examined in this study.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Use of osteopathic manipulative treatment by Ohio osteopathic physicians in various specialties.

The authors mailed a survey designed to determine the use of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) to the 2,318 active osteopathic physicians registered with the Ohio Osteopathic Association; 871 responses were received, for a response rate of 38%. Approximately 75% of the respondents had not or had rarely used OMT: 44% of these respondents did not use any OMT and 31% reported treating fewer than 10 patients with OMT during the week before the survey. Approximately 25% of the surveyed osteopathic physicians treated more than 10 patients with OMT, and about 6% of these treated more than 30 patients with OMT. Respondents represented 40 specialty disciplines. All of the osteopathic physicians in 17 specialties reported no OMT use, osteopathic physicians in 9 specialties reported using OMT for fewer than 10 patients during the previous week, and osteopathic physicians in 9 specialties reported using OMT for more than 10 patients during the previous week. Of the somatic dysfunctions listed in the survey, low back disorders were treated with OMT most often. Few osteopathic specialists used OMT for patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The data suggest that a great opportunity exists to increase the use of OMT by osteopathic physicians, especially those who are specialists.

Data Collection↗
PubMed2000

Effects of a structured curriculum in osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) on osteopathic structural examinations and use of OMT for hospitalized patients.

Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is a defining feature of osteopathic medicine; however, use of OMT by osteopathic physicians is declining. Recent studies reveal that many osteopathic physicians are abandoning use of OMT as early as medical school. Current national efforts are aimed at reversing this trend by standardizing osteopathic medical records and clinical training in OMT. The authors found that a structured clinical curriculum in OMT taught to house staff significantly increased the percentage of patients who received osteopathic structural examinations and the percentage of patients who received OMT as part of their hospital care.

Curriculum↗
PubMed2003

Osteopathic manipulative treatment techniques preferred by contemporary osteopathic physicians.

Data presented in this study were gathered through a national mail survey of 3000 randomly selected osteopathic physicians. A total of 955 questionnaires were usable for analysis. Osteopathic physicians' likelihood of using eleven osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) techniques (articulatory, counterstrain, cranial, facilitated positional release, fascial ligamentous release, functional, high-velocity low-amplitude thrust, lymphatic, muscle energy, myofascial/integrated neuromuscular release, and soft tissue) was determined. The relative frequency of use from most (soft tissue) to least (cranial) used was also determined. Respondents were more likely to use direct techniques than indirect or direct-indirect techniques. Demographic variables of gender, age, and specialty training were found to be related to the techniques used most. Female osteopathic physicians and older osteopathic physicians were more likely to use indirect techniques, whereas male and younger physicians preferred direct techniques. Moreover, OMT specialists used a broader range of techniques than other osteopathic physicians, and family physicians were more apt to use high-velocity low-amplitude thrust than other primary care or non-primary care osteopathic physicians. These results not only have implications for curricular planning in all phases of osteopathic undergraduate medical education, graduate medical education, and continuing medical education programs, but also for research on the quality and effectiveness of various OMT techniques.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Osteopathic manipulative treatment for postoperative pain.

Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is an important aspect of pain management and disease prevention. Advantages of OMT administered postoperatively include easy implementation and cost-effectiveness in terms of shortened hospital stays resulting from effective relief of acute pain. Patients who receive morphine preoperatively and OMT postoperatively tend to have less postoperative pain and require less intravenously administered morphine. In addition, OMT and relief of pain lead to decreased postoperative morbidity and mortality and increased patient satisfaction. Also, soft tissue manipulative techniques and thoracic pump techniques help to promote early ambulation and body movement.

Humans↗
PubMed2003

Osteopathic manipulative treatment for chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial was conducted. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of osteopathic manipulative treatment as a complementary treatment for chronic nonspecific low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Osteopathic manipulative treatment may be useful for acute or subacute low back pain. However, its role in chronic low back pain is unclear. METHODS: This trial was conducted in a university-based clinic from 2000 through 2001. Of the 199 subjects who responded to recruitment procedures, 91 met the eligibility criteria. They were randomized, with 82 patients completing the 1-month follow-up evaluation, 71 completing the 3-month evaluation, and 66 completing the 6-month evaluation. The subjects were randomized to osteopathic manipulative treatment, sham manipulation, or a no-intervention control group, and they were allowed to continue their usual care for low back pain. The main outcomes included the SF-36 Health Survey, a 10-cm visual analog scale for overall back pain, the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, lost work or school days because of back pain, and satisfaction with back care. RESULTS: As compared with the no-intervention control subjects, the patients who received osteopathic manipulative treatment reported greater improvements in back pain, greater satisfaction with back care throughout the trial, better physical functioning and mental health at 1 month, and fewer cotreatments at 6 months. The subjects who received sham manipulation also reported greater improvements in back pain and physical functioning and greater satisfaction than the no-intervention control subjects. There were no significant benefits with osteopathic manipulative treatment, as compared with sham manipulation. CONCLUSIONS: Osteopathic manipulative treatment and sham manipulation both appear to provide some benefits when used in addition to usual care for the treatment of chronic nonspecific low back pain. It remains unclear whether the benefits of osteopathic manipulative treatment can be attributed to the manipulative techniques themselves or whether they are related to other aspects of osteopathic manipulative treatment, such as range of motion activities or time spent interacting with patients, which may represent placebo effects.

Chronic Disease↗
PubMed2000

The effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative treatment as complementary therapy following surgery: a prospective, match-controlled outcome study.

CONTEXT: Osteopathic manipulative treatment has been reported to relieve a variety of conditions, but no studies have examined the outcome effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment as a complementary modality for treating musculoskeletal problems during postoperative recovery. OBJECTIVE: To assess osteopathic manipulative treatment as a complementary therapy for patients undergoing elective knee or hip arthroplasty. DESIGN: Prospective, single-blinded, 2-group, match-controlled outcome study. SETTING: Osteopathic teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Of 166 eligible patients, 38 were assigned to a treatment group and matched with 38 control subjects. INTERVENTION: The treatment group received osteopathic manipulative treatment on postoperative days 2 through 5. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Days to independent negotiation of stairs, distance ambulated, supplemental intramuscular analgesic use, length of hospital stay, and patients' perceptions of treatment. RESULTS: Compared to control subjects, the intervention group negotiated stairs 20% earlier (mean = 4.3 postoperative days, SD = 1.2; control subjects 5.4, SD = 1.6, P = .006) and ambulated 43% farther on the third postoperative day (mean = 24.3 m, SD = 18.3; controls = 13.9, SD = 14.4, P = .008). The intervention group also required less analgesia, had shorter hospital stays, and ambulated farther on postoperative days 1, 2, and 4. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving osteopathic manipulative treatment in the early postoperative period negotiated stairs earlier and ambulated greater distances than did control group patients.

Aged↗
PubMed1990

Quality assurance monitoring of osteopathic manipulative treatment.

The quality assurance review program of military medicine has implications for civilian osteopathic medicine. Clinical monitors need to be developed that are based on the principles of osteopathy. Components of a quality assurance screening checklist for osteopathic manipulative treatment include credentials of the osteopathic physician, the diagnosis, either somatic dysfunction or other condition, the type of osteopathic manipulative treatment applied, and specific contraindications. A checklist applicable to osteopathic manipulative treatment that could be used by military and civilian sectors is suggested.

Clinical Protocols↗
PubMed2001

Diminished use of osteopathic manipulative treatment and its impact on the uniqueness of the osteopathic profession.

PURPOSE: To determine whether osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT), a key identifiable feature of osteopathic medicine, is becoming a "lost art" in the profession, and whether the long-term evolution of osteopathic medicine into mainstream medicine and particularly specialization has had a similar impact on the use of OMT by family practitioners and specialists. METHOD: In April 1998, a two-page questionnaire was mailed to 3,000 randomly selected osteopathic physicians in the United States to assess factors affecting their use of OMT. Descriptive statistics, linear regression analyses, and analysis of variance techniques were used to test for differences. RESULTS: The response rate was 33.2%. Over 50% of the responding osteopathic physicians used OMT on less than 5% of their patients, and analysis of variance revealed OMT use was significantly affected by practice type, graduation date, and family physicians versus specialists. For specialists, 58% of the variance regression was attributed to barriers to use, practice protocol, attitudes, and training, whereas for family physicians, 43% of the variance regression was attributed to barriers to use, practice protocol, and attitudes. More important, the eventual level of OMT use was related to whether postgraduate training had been undertaken in osteopathic, allopathic, or mixed staff facilities, particularly for osteopathic specialists. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence supports the assertion that OMT is becoming a lost art among osteopathic practitioners. Osteopathic as well as allopathic medical educators and policymakers should address the impact of the diminished use of OMT on both U.S. health care and the unique identifying practices associated with the osteopathic profession.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Evaluation of osteopathic manipulative treatment training by practicing physicians in Ohio.

The authors mailed a survey designed to evaluate beliefs about osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) training to the 2318 osteopathic physicians registered with the Ohio Osteopathic Association. Responses were received from 871 osteopathic physicians (response rate, 38%). Fifty-three percent of the respondents had used OMT with patients at least once during the week before the survey. With regard to OMT training, 60% rated their experience during medical school as acceptable; during postgraduate training the acceptable rating dropped to 9%. Osteopathic manipulative treatment training through continuing medical education programs was rated as acceptable by 26% who had participated in these programs. Forty percent of the respondents reported that they were practicing less OMT now than when they originally entered practice, while 20% reported using OMT procedures more often. No significant correlation was observed between OMT training satisfaction during medical school and current use of OMT. However, a strong negative correlation was observed between satisfaction with postgraduate OMT training and OMT use. This survey did not detect any association between year of graduation and use of OMT.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed1999

Adjunctive osteopathic manipulative treatment in the elderly hospitalized with pneumonia: a pilot study.

To evaluate the benefit of osteopathic manipulative treatment in the elderly with pneumonia, the authors recruited 21 individuals older than 60 years who were hospitalized with acute pneumonia. Eleven patients were randomly assigned to the treatment group and ten to the control group. The treatment group received specific osteopathic manipulative treatment for somatic dysfunction and a standardized treatment protocol. Both groups received conventional therapy, and the attending physician was blind to group assignments. No significant difference existed between groups for age, sex, or severity of illness. Although the mean duration of leukocytosis, intravenous antibiotic treatment, and length of stay were shorter for the treatment group, these measures did not reach statistical significance. However, the mean duration of oral antibiotic use did reach statistical significance at 3.1 days for the treatment group and 0.8 day for the control group. Osteopathic manipulative treatment may reduce antibiotic use and length of stay; however, a larger study is needed to clarify this outcome.

Aged↗
PubMed1994

Effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment in patients with cervicothoracic pain: pilot study using thermography.

To provide information on how cervicothoracic pain responds to osteopathic manipulative treatment, five subjects with acute or chronic pain received appropriate medication and three osteopathic manipulative treatments by the principal investigator using thrust and nonthrust techniques. The mean number of findings by both investigators on structural examination decreased considerably immediately after each of the three treatments. The number of findings increased in week 2 and decreased in week 3. The principal investigator observed a further decrease by the final session, but the coinvestigator reported an increase. The pain scale score improved an average of nearly 30%. Thermography showed cooling of the cervicothoracic region in all subjects and conversion to a normal pattern in four. Osteopathic manipulative treatment should be considered for patients with acute or chronic cervicothoracic pain. The use of thermographic analysis in clinical osteopathic research seems warranted.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

The use of osteopathic manipulative treatment as adjuvant therapy in children with recurrent acute otitis media.

OBJECTIVE: To study effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment as an adjuvant therapy to routine pediatric care in children with recurrent acute otitis media (AOM). STUDY DESIGN: Patients 6 months to 6 years old with 3 episodes of AOM in the previous 6 months, or 4 in the previous year, who were not already surgical candidates were placed randomly into 2 groups: one receiving routine pediatric care, the other receiving routine care plus osteopathic manipulative treatment. Both groups received an equal number of study encounters to monitor behavior and obtain tympanograms. Clinical status was monitored with review of pediatric records. The pediatrician was blinded to patient group and study outcomes, and the osteopathic physician was blinded to patient clinical course. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We monitored frequency of episodes of AOM, antibiotic use, surgical interventions, various behaviors, and tympanometric and audiometric performance. RESULTS: A total of 57 patients, 25 intervention patients and 32 control patients, met criteria and completed the study. Adjusting for the baseline frequency before study entry, intervention patients had fewer episodes of AOM (mean group difference per month, -0.14 [95% confidence interval, -0.27 to 0.00]; P =.04), fewer surgical procedures (intervention patients, 1; control patients, 8; P =.03), and more mean surgery-free months (intervention patients, 6.00; control patients, 5.25; P =.01). Baseline and final tympanograms obtained by the audiologist showed an increased frequency of more normal tympanogram types in the intervention group, with an adjusted mean group difference of 0.55 (95% confidence interval, 0.08 to 1.02; P =.02). No adverse reactions were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest a potential benefit of osteopathic manipulative treatment as adjuvant therapy in children with recurrent AOM; it may prevent or decrease surgical intervention or antibiotic overuse.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2002

Quality of life in referred patients presenting to a specialty clinic for osteopathic manipulative treatment.

Previous research has found that patients of osteopathic physicians tend to report poorer general health perceptions than persons in the general population or than patients of allopathic physicians. Quality of life and level of healthcare satisfaction in patients referred to a specialty clinic for osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) at a college of osteopathic medicine were measured in 1997. Data from the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form (SF-36) were used to compute standardized scores in the following eight health scales: physical functioning, role limitations because of physical problems, bodily pain, general health perceptions, vitality, social functioning, role limitations because of emotional problems, and mental health. There were 185 patients who returned the survey (mean response rate, 90%), including 22 new and 163 established patients. Patients reported poorer health than the general population on all eight scales (P < .001). Patients frequently reported poorer quality of life than referents with hypertension, congestive heart failure, type 2 diabetes mellitus, recent acute myocardial infarction, or clinical depression. More than 97% of established patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the healthcare received at the clinic. This study suggests that referred patients presenting to osteopathic physicians for OMT may have poorer quality of life than is generally recognized when relying only on traditional diagnostic approaches. Early detection and treatment of musculoskeletal conditions may be important factors in preventing chronicity and its impact on quality of life.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Quantifiable effects of osteopathic manipulative techniques on patients with chronic asthma.

In this pilot study, the authors evaluated the immediate effects of osteopathic manipulative procedures compared with sham procedures on 10 subjects who were diagnosed with chronic asthma. The research followed a pretest-posttest crossover design wherein each subject served as her own control. Blinded examiners recorded respiratory excursion, peak expiratory flow rates, and subjective measures of asthma symptoms. Measurements of both upper thoracic and lower thoracic forced respiratory excursion statistically increased after osteopathic manipulative procedures compared with sham procedures. Changes in peak expiratory flow rates and asthma symptoms were not statistically significant.

Adult↗