Impact of osteopathic manipulative techniques on the management of dizziness caused by neuro-otologic disorders: systematic review and meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) has been utilized by osteopathic clinicians as primary or adjunctive management for dizziness caused by neuro-otologic disorders. To our knowledge, no current systematic reviews provide pooled estimates that evaluate the impact of OMT on dizziness. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of OMT and analogous techniques in the treatment of dizziness. METHODS: We performed a literature search in CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), EMCare, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), PubMed, PsycINFO, Osteopathic Medicine Digital Library (OSTMED.DR), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from inception to March 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective or retrospective observational studies of adult patients experiencing dizziness from neuro-otological disorders. Eligible studies compared the effectiveness of OMT or OMT analogous techniques with a comparator intervention, such as a sham manipulation, a different manual technique, standard of care, or a nonpharmacological intervention like exercise or behavioral therapy. Assessed outcomes included disability associated with dizziness, dizziness severity, dizziness frequency, risk of fall, improvement in quality of life (QOL), and return to work (RTW). Assessed harm outcomes included all-cause dropout (ACD) rates, dropouts due to inefficacy, and adverse events. The meta-analysis was based on the similarities between the OMT or OMT analogous technique and the comparator interventions. The risk of bias (ROB) was assessed utilizing a modified version of the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for RCTs and the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) for observational studies. The quality of evidence was determined utilizing the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: There were 3,375 studies identified and screened, and the full text of 47 of them were reviewed. Among those, 12 (11 RCTs, 1 observational study, n=367 participants) met the inclusion criteria for data extraction. Moderate-quality evidence showed that articular OMT techniques were associated with decreases (all p<0.01) in disability associated with dizziness (n=141, mean difference [MD]=-11, 95% confidence interval [CI]=-16.2 to -5.9), dizziness severity (n=158, MD=-1.6, 95% CI=-2.4 to -0.7), and dizziness frequency (n=136, MD=-0.6, 95% CI=-1.1 to -0.2). Low-quality evidence showed that articular OMT was not associated with ACD rates (odds ratio [OR]=2.2, 95% CI=0.5 to 10.2, p=0.31). When data were pooled for any type of OMT technique, findings were similar; however, disability associated with dizziness and ACD rates had high heterogeneity (I2=59 and 46%). No studies met all of the criteria for ROB. CONCLUSIONS: The current review found moderate-quality evidence that treatment with articular OMT techniques was significantly associated with decreased disability associated with dizziness, dizziness severity, and dizziness frequency. However, our findings should be interpreted cautiously because of the high ROB and small sample sizes in the eligible studies.

Use of real-time physiologic parameter assessment to augment osteopathic manipulative treatment training for first-year osteopathic medical students.

CONTEXT: The first 2 years of osteopathic medical school involve training in osteopathic principles and practice, including understanding the tenets of osteopathic medicine and developing palpatory skills for clinical application. Although this training emphasizes the link between somatic dysfunction and physiologic function, it does not include the opportunity for students to quantitatively assess the physiologic effect of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) using physiologic measurements. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an approach for integrated OMT training coupled with physiologic measurements of relevant parameters, whereby first-year osteopathic medical students assess the quantitative, real-time changes in specific physiologic signals during instruction. METHODS: During mandatory musculoskeletal and cardiovascular demonstration laboratories at a single osteopathic medical school, students were divided into small groups and performed OMT on each other while recording real-time measurements of physiologic functions such as maximum clench force, time to fatigue for the forearm flexor muscles, heart rate, and peripheral vascular flow. After data were collected, students analyzed pre- and post-OMT measurements and discussed underlying physiologic principles in a large group format. At the end of the sessions, students completed a brief survey on the usefulness of the integrated laboratories. RESULTS: Overall, 13 of 28 student groups (46.4%) measured a pre- to post-OMT increase in maximum clench force, and 16 (57.1%) observed an increase in time to fatigue for the forearm flexor muscles. Twenty-three of 27 student groups (85.2%) observed a reduction in heart rate and 19 (70.4%) measured an increase in peripheral vascular flow after OMT. Student satisfaction was generally favorable, with overall mean (SD) ratings of 6.38 (1.86) for the musculoskeletal laboratory and 7.81 (1.69) for the cardiovascular laboratory out of a maximum of 10 points. In open-ended comments, students deemed the combined laboratories as clinically applicable but desired more time for completing the laboratories. CONCLUSION: Measurement of specific physiologic musculoskeletal and cardiovascular parameters before and after OMT enabled quantification of physiologic responses to OMT. Students' favorable feedback indicated that the quality of learning in the laboratories was enhanced by the addition of physiologic measurements.