Scott T. Stoll

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.

Efficacy of osteopathic manipulation as an adjunctive treatment for hospitalized patients with pneumonia: a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundThe Multicenter Osteopathic Pneumonia Study in the Elderly (MOPSE) is a registered, double-blinded, randomized, controlled trial designed to assess the efficacy of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) as an adjunctive treatment in elderly patients with pneumonia.Methods406 subjects aged ≥ 50 years hospitalized with pneumonia at 7 community hospitals were randomized using concealed allocation to conventional care only (CCO), light-touch treatment (LT), or OMT groups. All subjects received conventional treatment for pneumonia. OMT and LT groups received group-specific protocols for 15 minutes, twice daily until discharge, cessation of antibiotics, respiratory failure, death, or withdrawal from the study. The primary outcomes were hospital length of stay (LOS), time to clinical stability, and a symptomatic and functional recovery score.ResultsIntention-to-treat (ITT) analysis (n = 387) found no significant differences between groups. Per-protocol (PP) analysis (n = 318) found a significant difference between groups (P = 0.01) in LOS. Multiple comparisons indicated a reduction in median LOS (95% confidence interval) for the OMT group (3.5 [3.2-4.0] days) versus the CCO group (4.5 [3.9-4.9] days), but not versus the LT group (3.9 [3.5-4.8] days). Secondary outcomes of duration of intravenous antibiotics and treatment endpoint were also significantly different between groups (P = 0.05 and 0.006, respectively). Duration of intravenous antibiotics and death or respiratory failure were lower for the OMT group versus the CCO group, but not versus the LT group.ConclusionsITT analysis found no differences between groups. PP analysis found significant reductions in LOS, duration of intravenous antibiotics, and respiratory failure or death when OMT was compared to CCO. Given the prevalence of pneumonia, adjunctive OMT merits further study.

A randomized, controlled trial of osteopathic manipulative treatment for acute low back pain in active duty military personnel

Abstract Objective Acute low back pain (ALBP) may limit mobility and impose functional limitations in active duty military personnel. Although some manual therapies have been reported effective for ALBP in military personnel, there have been no published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) in the military. Furthermore, current military ALBP guidelines do not specifically include OMT. Methods This RCT examined the efficacy of OMT in relieving ALBP and improving functioning in military personnel at Fort Lewis, Washington. Sixty-three male and female soldiers ages 18 to 35 were randomly assigned to a group receiving OMT plus usual care or a group receiving usual care only (UCO). Results The primary outcome measures were pain on the quadruple visual analog scale, and functioning on the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire. Outcomes were measured immediately preceding each of four treatment sessions and at four weeks post-trial. Intention to treat analysis found significantly greater post-trial improvement in ‘Pain Now’ for OMT compared to UCO (P = 0·026). Furthermore, the OMT group reported less ‘Pain Now’ and ‘Pain Typical’ at all visits (P = 0·025 and P = 0·020 respectively). Osteopathic manipulative treatment subjects also tended to achieve a clinically meaningful improvement from baseline on ‘Pain at Best’ sooner than the UCO subjects. With similar baseline expectations, OMT subjects reported significantly greater satisfaction with treatment and overall self-reported improvement (P<0·01). Conclusion This study supports the effectiveness of OMT in reducing ALBP pain in active duty military personnel.

Lymph Flow in the Thoracic Duct of Conscious Dogs During Lymphatic Pump Treatment, Exercise, and Expansion of Extracellular Fluid Volume

BACKGROUND This investigation examined interactions between expansion of the extracellular fluid volume (ECE), osteopathic lymphatic pump treatment (LPT), and exercise on lymph flow in the thoracic duct of eight instrumented, conscious dogs. METHODS AND RESULTS After recovery from surgery, LPT was performed for 8 min before and after ECE with normal saline, i.v., 4.4+/-0.3% of body weight. Baseline lymph flow was 1.7+/-0.5 mL/min. LPT rapidly increased lymph flow to 5.0+/-1.1 mL/min at 1 min, and lymph flow remained above baseline for 4 min (p<0.05). LPT produced a net increase in lymph flow of 15.4+/-1.1 mL. Following ECE, baseline lymph flow was 4.8+/-0.6 mL/min (p<0.05). LPT increased lymph flow to 9.9+/-1.1 mL/min at 1 min (p<0.05), and lymph flow remained above baseline for 4 min (p<0.05); all flow values after ECE were greater than corresponding values before ECE. However, the net increase in lymph flow produced by 8 min of LPT (18.3+/-3.8 mL) was not significantly greater than that observed before ECE. Moderate treadmill exercise increased lymph flow for 4 min before ECE and for 6 min after ECE. All lymph flows during exercise were greater after ECE than before ECE. The net increase in lymph flow produced by 8 min of exercise was 24.9+/-5.5 mL before ECE and 39.6+/-5.1 mL after ECE (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS Expansion of the extracellular fluid volume produced large increases in thoracic duct lymph flow, that were further augmented by lymphatic pump treatment and by moderate treadmill exercise.

A case-control study of osteopathic palpatory findings in type 2 diabetes mellitus

BackgroundAlthough type 2 diabetes mellitus is often managed by osteopathic physicians, osteopathic palpatory findings in this disease have not been adequately studied.MethodsA case-control study was used to measure the association between type 2 diabetes mellitus and a series of 30 osteopathic palpatory findings. The latter included skin changes, trophic changes, tissue changes, tenderness, and immobility at spinal segmental levels T5–T7, T8–T10, and T11-L2 bilaterally. Logistic regression models that adjusted for age, sex, and comorbid conditions were used to compute odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the associations between type 2 diabetes mellitus and each of these findings.Results and discussionA total of 92 subjects were included in the study. After controlling for age, sex, hypertension, and clinical depression, the only significant finding was an association between type 2 diabetes mellitus and tissue changes at T11-L2 on the right side (OR, 5.54; 95% CI, 1.76–17.47; P = .003). Subgroup analyses of subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension demonstrated significant associations with tissue changes at T11-L2 bilaterally (OR, 27.38; 95% CI, 1.75–428; P = .02 for the left side and OR, 24.00; 95% CI, 1.51–382; P = .02 for the right side). Among subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension, there was also a strong diabetes mellitus duration effect for tissue changes at T11-L2 bilaterally (OR, 12.00; 95% CI, 1.02–141; P = .05 for short duration vs. OR, 32.00; 95% CI, 2.29–448; P = .01 for long duration on the left side; and OR, 17.33; 95% CI, 1.39–217; P = .03 for short duration vs. OR, 32.00; 95% CI, 2.29–448; P = .01 for long duration on the right side).ConclusionThe only consistent finding in this study was an association between type 2 diabetes mellitus and tissue changes at T11-L2 on the right side. Potential explanations for this finding include reflex viscerosomatic changes directly related to the progression of type 2 diabetes mellitus, a spurious association attributable to confounding visceral diseases, or a chance observation unrelated to type 2 diabetes mellitus. Larger prospective studies are needed to better study osteopathic palpatory findings in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Patient expectations for placebo treatments commonly used in osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) clinical trials: a pilot study

BackgroundPlacebo treatments should be believable to ensure expectation of benefit, yet not provide a true treatment effect. One obstacle to conducting clinical trials with osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is choosing an appropriate placebo. Various placebo treatments have been used in OMT clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to determine expectations of 3 treatments (HVLA, placebo light touch, placebo sub-therapeutic ultrasound) commonly used in OMT clinical research trials.MethodsA randomized, cross-over design was utilized. Subjects were recruited from the Family Medicine Clinic, Texas College of Osteopathic Medicine. Participants watched a video with 2 minute demonstrations of a High Velocity Low Amplitude (HVLA), placebo light touch (LT), and placebo sub-therapeutic ultrasound (ULTRA) treatment for low back pain. The order of presentations was randomized to control for order effect bias. Subjects indicated the extent of their agreement (using a 4 point Likert scale) with 4 statements that were presented after each treatment was viewed: 1)I believe this treatment would allow me to get better quicker; 2)I believe this treatment would decrease my low back pain; 3)I believe this treatment would make me more able to do the things I want to do; 4)This seems like a logical way to treat low back pain. Repeated measures analysis of variance was performed, and a partial Eta squared was calculated for each statement. Effect sizes (Cohens d) were calculated where appropriate.ResultsThirty of 40 eligible subjects participated. Twenty-two (73%) were female, 16 (53%) were Caucasian, and 11 (37%) had completed college. The mean age was 43 (SD = 15.). Repeated measures ANOVA revealed no significant differences for statements 2 and 4. For both statements 1 (p = 0.025) and 3 (p = 0.039), post hoc analysis revealed a difference between HVLA and LT. The partial Eta squared (ηp2) was 0.105, 0.072, 0.107, and 0.024 for each statement, respectively.ConclusionThere is a difference in treatment expectation between HVLA and LT for statements 1 and 3. Participants responded more positively after viewing the HVLA treatment than the LT treatment. This suggests that sub-therapeutic ultrasound is the better placebo because the expectations were similar to those for HVLA.

The National Osteopathic Research Center at the University of North Texas Health Science Center: Inception, Growth, and Future

The osteopathic profession has long recognized the need to carry out research in order to improve clinical care. Osteopathic physicians have a particular obligation to carry out research in areas, such as osteopathic manipulative medicine (OMM), that are unique to osteopathic medicine. OMM is similar to manual therapy that is performed by other types of practitioners, but it has some distinctive characteristics. Osteopathic doctors also use OMM to treat infectious disease-not just musculoskeletal disorders.In 2001, several osteopathic professional organizations agreed to jointly fund a national osteopathic research center at one of the osteopathic medical colleges. Five osteopathic colleges submitted research proposals in response to a request for applications. The University of North Texas Health Science Center (UNTHSC) was chosen to be the site for the Osteopathic Research Center (ORC) and was funded for four years with

Pregnancy Research on Osteopathic Manipulation Optimizing Treatment Effects: The PROMOTE Study Protocol

1.1M. Between 2002 and 2007, the ORC received an additional

Increased lymphatic flow in the thoracic duct during manipulative intervention.

11M in research support from multiple sources including federal funds. With this support, it has made substantive contributions to science. These include oversight of the recently completed four-year,

Abdominal Lymphatic Pump Treatment Increases Leukocyte Count and Flux in Thoracic Duct Lymph

1.5M multicenter study on the efficacy of OMM as a treatment for pneumonia in the elderly and a three-year,