| For medical practitioners and osteopaths - Osteopathy Journal Articles Catalog. |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
| First Page | Previous Page | Next Page | Last Page |
| Osteopathic manipulation for syndromes of the brachial plexus Larson, N. J. (1972), J Am Osteopath Assoc 72(4): 378-84. |
| Osteopathic manipulation in a hospital environment Stiles, E. G. (1976), J Am Osteopath Assoc 76(4): 243-58. |
| Osteopathic manipulation in the treatment of muscle-contraction headache Hoyt, W. H., F. Shaffer, et al. (1979), J Am Osteopath Assoc 78(5): 322-5. |
| Osteopathic manipulation resulting in damage to spinal cord Davis, C. (1985), Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 291(6508): 1540-1. |
| Osteopathic manipulation resulting in damage to spinal cord Davis, C. (1986), Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 292(6514): 205. |
| Osteopathic manipulation to prevent otitis media--does it work? Pichichero, M. E. (2003), Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 157(9): 852-3. |
| Osteopathic manipulation under general anesthesia Morey, L. W., Jr. (1973), J Am Osteopath Assoc 73(2): 116-27. |
| Osteopathic manipulation: purposes and protocols Kuchera, W. A. (1989), Hosp Pract (Off Ed) 24(7): 17, 20. |
| Osteopathic manipulative management of arthritis Nelson, C. R. (1950), J Am Osteopath Assoc 49(6): 289-91. |
| Osteopathic manipulative medicine in the treatment of hypertension: an alternative, conventional approach Spiegel, A. J., J. D. Capobianco, et al. (2003), Heart Dis 5(4): 272-8. Abstract: The branch of medicine known as osteopathy was founded by Andrew Taylor Still in the mid to late 19th century. Osteopathy is a philosophy of medicine. Osteopathic physicians use techniques collectively referred to as osteopathic manipulative medicine (OMM). One of the most common diseases suffered by those residing in westernized nations is hypertension. Although osteopathic physicians are taught to incorporate OMM into the management of medical disorders, the usefulness of OMM in treating hypertension is less clear. This review reflects on the past 90 years of biomedical literature and attempts to address the utility of OMM used alone, or in combination with other treatments including antihypertensive medication, for the effective management of hypertension. Preliminary evidence may suggest a role for OMM in treating hypertension within the context of a multifaceted and long-lasting treatment regimen that may include traditional pharmacotherapeutics. To have universal acceptance, controlled and blinded outcome studies are needed to determine the effectiveness of OMM for the routine treatment of hypertension. |
| Osteopathic manipulative therapy as a primary factor in the management of upper, middle, and pararespiratory infections Schmidt, I. C. (1982), J Am Osteopath Assoc 81(6): 382-8. |
| Osteopathic manipulative therapy in geriatric practice Thomas, R. B. (1956), J Am Osteopath Assoc 55(9): 539-43. |
| Osteopathic manipulative therapy, antibiotics, and supportive therapy in respiratory infections in children: comparative study Kline, C. A. (1965), J Am Osteopath Assoc 65(3): 278-81. |
| Osteopathic manipulative treatment and outcomes for pneumonia Bratzler, D. W. (2001), J Am Osteopath Assoc 101(8): 427-8. |
| Osteopathic manipulative treatment applications for the emergency department patient Paul, F. A. and B. R. Buser (1996), J Am Osteopath Assoc 96(7): 403-9. Abstract: The emergency department (ED) setting offers osteopathic physicians multiple opportunities to provide osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) as either the primary therapy or as an adjunct to the intervention. In doing so, osteopathic physicians can decrease or eliminate the morbidity and symptoms associated with protracted dysfunction. Low back pain, chest pain, torticollis, asthma, and sinusitis are some of the illnesses in which OMT should be implemented as part of the management plan, note the authors. They provide a guide to the general usage of OMT when the aforementioned illnesses present themselves in ED patients, but also emphasize the importance of first ruling out any underlying illnesses that could be manifested by musculoskeletal symptoms. |
| Osteopathic manipulative treatment for chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial Licciardone, J. C., S. T. Stoll, et al. (2003), Spine 28(13): 1355-62. Abstract: 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. |
| Osteopathic manipulative treatment for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Licciardone, J. C., A. K. Brimhall, et al. (2005), BMC Musculoskelet Disord 6: 43. Abstract: BACKGROUND: Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is a distinctive modality commonly used by osteopathic physicians to complement their conventional treatment of musculoskeletal disorders. Previous reviews and meta-analyses of spinal manipulation for low back pain have not specifically addressed OMT and generally have focused on spinal manipulation as an alternative to conventional treatment. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of OMT as a complementary treatment for low back pain. METHODS: Computerized bibliographic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, MANTIS, OSTMED, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were supplemented with additional database and manual searches of the literature. Six trials, involving eight OMT vs control treatment comparisons, were included because they were randomized controlled trials of OMT that involved blinded assessment of low back pain in ambulatory settings. Data on trial methodology, OMT and control treatments, and low back pain outcomes were abstracted by two independent reviewers. Effect sizes were computed using Cohen's d statistic and meta-analysis results were weighted by the inverse variance of individual comparisons. In addition to the overall meta-analysis, stratified meta-analyses were performed according to control treatment, country where the trial was conducted, and duration of follow-up. Sensitivity analyses were performed for both the overall and stratified meta-analyses. RESULTS: Overall, OMT significantly reduced low back pain (effect size, -0.30; 95% confidence interval, -0.47 - -0.13; P =.001). Stratified analyses demonstrated significant pain reductions in trials of OMT vs active treatment or placebo control and OMT vs no treatment control. There were significant pain reductions with OMT regardless of whether trials were performed in the United Kingdom or the United States. Significant pain reductions were also observed during short-, intermediate-, and long-term follow-up. CONCLUSION: OMT significantly reduces low back pain. The level of pain reduction is greater than expected from placebo effects alone and persists for at least three months. Additional research is warranted to elucidate mechanistically how OMT exerts its effects, to determine if OMT benefits are long lasting, and to assess the cost-effectiveness of OMT as a complementary treatment for low back pain. |
| Osteopathic manipulative treatment for postoperative pain Nicholas, A. S. and S. L. Oleski (2002), J Am Osteopath Assoc 102(9 Suppl 3): S5-8. Abstract: 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. |
| Osteopathic manipulative treatment in conjunction with medication relieves pain associated with fibromyalgia syndrome: results of a randomized clinical pilot project Gamber, R. G., J. H. Shores, et al. (2002), J Am Osteopath Assoc 102(6): 321-5. Abstract: Osteopathic physicians caring for patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FM) often use osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) in conjunction with other forms of standard medical care. Despite a growing body of evidence on the efficacy of manual therapy for the treatment of selected acute musculoskeletal conditions, the role of OMT in treating patients with chronic conditions such as FM remains largely unknown. Twenty-four female patients meeting American College of Rheumatology criteria for FM were randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups: (1) manipulation group, (2) manipulation and teaching group, (3) moist heat group, and (4) control group, which received no additional treatment other than current medication. Participants' pain perceptions were assessed by use of pain thresholds measured at each of 10 bilateral tender points using a 9-kg dolorimeter, the Chronic Pain Experience Inventory, and the Present Pain Intensity Rating Scale. Patients' affective response to treatment was assessed using the Self-Evaluation Questionnaire. Activities of daily living were assessed using the Stanford Arthritis Center Disability and Discomfort Scales: Health Assessment Questionnaire. Depression was assessed using the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale. Significant findings between the four treatment groups on measures of pain threshold, perceived pain, attitude toward treatment, activities of daily living, and perceived functional ability were found. All of these findings favored use of OMT. This study found OMT combined with standard medical care was more efficacious in treating FM than standard care alone. These findings need to be replicated to determine if cost savings are incurred when treatments for FM incorporate nonpharmacologic approaches such as OMT. |
| Osteopathic manipulative treatment in prenatal care: a retrospective case control design study King, H. H., M. A. Tettambel, et al. (2003), J Am Osteopath Assoc 103(12): 577-82. Abstract: The use of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) during pregnancy has a long tradition in osteopathic medicine. A retrospective study was designed to compare a group of women who received prenatal OMT with a matched group that did not receive prenatal OMT. The medical records of 160 women from four cities who received prenatal OMT were reviewed for the occurrence of meconium-stained amniotic fluid, preterm delivery, use of forceps, and cesarean delivery. The randomly selected records of 161 women who were from the same cities, but who did not receive prenatal OMT, were reviewed for the same outcomes. The results of a logistic regression analysis were statistically reliable, chi2 (4, N = 321) = 26.55; P <.001, indicating that the labor and delivery outcomes, as a set, were associated with whether OMT was administered during pregnancy. According to the Wald criterion, prenatal OMT was significantly associated with meconium-stained amniotic fluid (Z = 13.20, P <.001) and preterm delivery (Z = 9.91; P <.01), while the use of forceps was found to be marginally significant (Z = 3.28; P =.07). The case control study found evidence of improved outcomes in labor and delivery for women who received prenatal OMT, compared with women who did not. A prospective study is proposed as the next step in evaluating the effects of prenatal OMT. |
| Osteopathic manipulative treatment in the emergency department for patients with acute ankle injuries Eisenhart, A. W., T. J. Gaeta, et al. (2003), J Am Osteopath Assoc 103(9): 417-21. Abstract: STUDY OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) as administered in the emergency department (ED) for the treatment of patients with acute ankle injuries. METHODS: Patients aged 18 years and older with unilateral ankle sprains were randomly assigned either to an OMT study group or a control group. Independent outcome variables included edema, range of motion (ROM), and pain. Both groups received the current standard of care for ankle sprains and were instructed to return for a follow-up examination. Patients in the OMT study group also received one session of OMT from an osteopathic physician. RESULTS: Patients in the OMT study group had a statistically significant (F = 5.92, P =.02) improvement in edema and pain and a trend toward increased ROM immediately following intervention with OMT. Although at follow-up both study groups demonstrated significant improvement, patients in the OMT study group had a statistically significant improvement in ROM when compared with patients in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Data clearly demonstrate that a single session of OMT in the ED can have a significant effect in the management of acute ankle injuries. |
| Osteopathic manipulative treatment techniques preferred by contemporary osteopathic physicians Johnson, S. M. and M. E. Kurtz (2003), J Am Osteopath Assoc 103(5): 219-24. Abstract: 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. |
| Osteopathic manipulative treatment: student attitudes before and after intensive clinical exposure Magnus, W. W. and R. G. Gamber (1997), J Am Osteopath Assoc 97(2): 109-13. Abstract: It is widely known that family practice osteopathic physicians actively use osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) as a part of their everyday practices, but many DOs in other specialty areas fail to use OMT at all. Physicians who use this modality often limit its use to musculoskeletal complaints. This pattern likely begins during undergraduate training at the time that OMT is taught. To warm student attitudes to OMT and provide a more integrated OMT training background, the University of North Texas Health Science Center at Fort Worth/Texas College of Osteopathic Medicine has added to the clinical curriculum a required 1-month rotation in manipulative medicine. With the rotation in place for a full academic year, it was important to determine the efficacy of the rotation curriculum. This assessment has been accomplished using a specialized protocol designed to gauge student attitudes and opinions regarding OMT, osteopathic medicine, and their own OMT skills. |
| Osteopathic manipulative treatment: what does it really do? Steiner, C. (1994), J Am Osteopath Assoc 94(1): 85-7. |
| Osteopathic medical component missed in treating anterior hip pain Fuller, D. B. (1997), J Am Osteopath Assoc 97(9): 514-5. |
| Osteopathic medical considerations of reflex sympathetic dystrophy Nelson, K. E. (1997), J Am Osteopath Assoc 97(5): 286-9. Abstract: Review of current medical literature reveals little understanding of the physiology underlying the complex signs and symptoms that accompany reflex sympathetic dystrophy (RSD). The author surveyed the osteopathic medical literature and found a significant body of research documenting the physiology of somatic dysfunction. The manifestations of upper thoracic somatic dysfunction are strikingly similar to those of RSD and may offer insight into its heretofore unexplained physiology of this disorder. |
| Osteopathic medical education adapts to a changing environment Ward, W. D. (1994), J Am Osteopath Assoc 94(11): 919. |
| Osteopathic medical education at the bridge to the 21st century Retz, K. C. (1996), J Am Osteopath Assoc 96(11): 649-50. |
| Osteopathic medical education in 1998 prepares for the future Retz, K. C. (1998), J Am Osteopath Assoc 98(11): 577-8. |
| Osteopathic medical education in 2002 Ross-Lee, B. (2002), J Am Osteopath Assoc 102(11): 574-5. |
| Osteopathic medical education in the 21st century--translating educational challenges into professional opportunities Kasovac, M. (1999), J Am Osteopath Assoc 99(8): 405-7. |
| Osteopathic medical education: renaissance or rhetoric? Teitelbaum, H. S., W. E. Bunn, 2nd, et al. (2003), J Am Osteopath Assoc 103(10): 489-90. |
| Osteopathic medical education: the introduction of managed care principles into our undergraduate curriculum Musser, A. E. and N. Vinn (1996), J Am Osteopath Assoc 96(10): 627-30. Abstract: The authors review the strengths of traditional osteopathic medical education, identify the principles that managed care organizations have identified as being essential in preparing physicians to succeed in the current medical marketplace, and discuss the advantages of incorporating the best principles of managed care into osteopathic medical education. They present a strategy and outline proposed by the Department of Family Medicine at the Western University of Health Sciences College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific for the integration of these principles into the undergraduate educational process. |
| Osteopathic medical educators should heed lesson from interns Johnston, W. L. (1991), J Am Osteopath Assoc 91(8): 748, 750. |
| Osteopathic medical school applicants not allopathic medical school 'rejects' Kasovac, M. (1998), J Am Osteopath Assoc 98(10): 539. |
| Osteopathic medical schools should foster sense of identity Fogel, R. M. (2001), J Am Osteopath Assoc 101(6): 330. |
| Osteopathic medical training revisited: developing tomorrow's physicians Innes, K. (2005), J Am Osteopath Assoc 105(3): 129. |
| Osteopathic medical training: developing the seasoned osteopathic physician Clark, R. C. (2004), J Am Osteopath Assoc 104(11): 452-4; author reply 454-5. |
| Osteopathic medicine Eaton, J. A., B. P. Bates, et al. (1991), Orthop Nurs 10(1): 51-5, 61. Abstract: Osteopathic physicians are licensed physicians practicing in all 50 states. This article describes the philosophy of Osteopathic Medicine and reviews the objective support for it. Special emphasis is placed on somatic, visceral, and psychologic interaction. Specific examples of Osteopathic Manipulative Therapy (OMT) are also described. |
| Osteopathic medicine 1947-1987. A PGM retrospective Rodos, J. J. (1987), Postgrad Med 82(3): 99-101. |