PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Manipulation, Osteopathic”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

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

At least 739 records · Page 41Linked to original sources
PubMed1999

Comparison of work and time estimates by chiropractic physicians with those of medical and osteopathic providers.

BACKGROUND: Resource-based relative value scales (RBRVS) have become a standard method for identifying costs and determining reimbursement for physician services. Development of RBRVS systems and methods are reviewed, and the RBRVS concept of physician "work" is defined. OBJECTIVE: Results of work and time inputs from chiropractic physicians are compared with those reported by osteopathic and medical specialties. Last, implications for reimbursement of chiropractic fee services are discussed. METHODS: Total work, intraservice work, and time inputs for clinical vignettes reported by chiropractic, osteopathic, and medical physicians are compared. Data for chiropractic work and time reports were drawn from a national random sample of chiropractors conducted as part of a 1997 workers' compensation chiropractic fee schedule development project. Medical and osteopathic inputs were drawn from RBRVS research conducted at Harvard University under a federal contract reported in 1990. Both data sets used the same or similar clinical vignettes and similar methods. Comparisons of work and time inputs are made for clinical vignettes to assess whether work reported by chiropractors is of similar magnitude and variability as work reported by other specialties. RESULTS: Chiropractic inputs for vignettes related to evaluation and management services are similar to those reported by medical specialists and osteopathic physicians. The range of variation between chiropractic work input and other specialties is of similar magnitude to that within other specialties. Chiropractors report greater work input for radiologic interpretation and lower work input for manipulation services. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractors seem to perform similar total "work" for evaluation and management services as other specialties. No basis exists for excluding chiropractors from using evaluation and management codes for reimbursement purposes on grounds of dissimilar physician time or work estimates. Greater work input by chiropractors in radiology interpretation may be related to a greater importance placed on findings in care planning. Consistently higher reports for osteopathic work input on manipulation are likely attributable to differences in reference vignettes used in the respective populations. Research with a common reference vignette used for manipulation providers is recommended, as is development of a single generic approach to coding for manipulation services.

Chiropractic↗
PubMed2005

Sources of bias in reviews of spinal manipulation for back pain.

The effectiveness of spinal manipulation as a treatment for back pain remains uncertain and controversial. This is because of methodological weakness in many of the published clinical trials and also because of markedly opposing interpretations of the primary data by different reviewers. We have systematically assessed a representative sample of recent reviews on this topic. Reviews were included in the analysis if they were published between 1993 and March 2004, were listed in PubMed with an abstract and categorised as a review or meta-analysis, and were written in English. They were also required to present the evidence from at least two referenced clinical trials of spinal manipulation for back pain and to reach a conclusion about the effectiveness of the intervention. Each review was evaluated for methodological quality. Twenty-nine reviews met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen reached an overall positive conclusion, 7 a negative conclusion and 6 a neutral conclusion regarding therapeutic effectiveness. There were statistically significant pairwise correlations between each of the three factors: direction of conclusion, methodological quality and authorship by osteopaths or chiropracters. This indicates an association between authorship by osteopaths or chiropractors and low methodological quality and positive conclusion. We conclude that the outcomes of reviews of this subject are strongly influenced by both scientific rigour and profession of authors. The effectiveness of spinal manipulation for back pain is less certain than many reviews suggest; most high quality reviews reach negative conclusions.

Authorship↗
PubMed2004

Inter- and intraexaminer reliability in palpation of the "primary respiratory mechanism" within the "cranial concept".

Inevitable subjectivity makes interexaminer reliability of manual assessment procedures a special matter of concern. The cranial concept (CC), one aspect of osteopathy, deals with very subtle changes that have to be palpated. One of the main principles of the CC is the primary respiratory mechanism (PRM), which is hypothesized to be a palpable physiological phenomenon that occurs in rhythmic cycles, called flexion- and extension-phase, which are independent from cardiac and respiratory rates. Palpation of the PRM is one of the first steps in assessment within the CC. An inter- and intraexaminer reliability study design for repeated measures was used in this study. Forty nine healthy subjects were palpated simultaneously twice, once at the head and once at the pelvis. PRM-frequency (f), the mean duration of the flexion phase and the mean ratio of flexion- to extension-phase were used as the main outcome measures. Inter- and intraexaminer reliability and correlations to the respiratory rates were analysed for all three parameters. Inter- as well as intraexaminer agreement could not be described beyond chance agreement, as the range within the 95% limits of agreement (e.g. for f=6.6 cycles/90 s) for all cases resembled the total range of values (e.g. for f=7 cycles/90 s) that were produced. A significant effect of the examiners' respiration was found for both examiners at the pelvis (P=0.004 for one examiner, P <0.0001 for the other examiner), and for one examiner only at the head (P=0.0017). No correlation could be found for the subjects' respiratory rates. In conclusion, PRM-rates could not be palpated reliably and under certain conditions were influenced by the examiners' respiratory rates. These results do not support the hypotheses behind the PRM. The role of PRM palpation for clinical decision making and the models explaining the PRM should therefore be rethought.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Manual therapy: a critical assessment of role in the profession of physical therapy.

Interest in manual therapy appears to continue to grow among physical therapy clinicians and educators throughout the world even though the underlying concepts and techniques have not been justified by a knowledge base. The purposes of this article are to critically assess the role of manual therapy within the physical therapy profession and to provide an introduction to the other articles in this special issue. Eisner's model of explicit, implicit, and null curricula is used as a framework for our analysis and our discussion of manual therapy. The explicit area of manual therapy includes discussions of the definition and the role of manual therapy, the scientific rationale for manual therapy, and manual therapy in education and a comparison of manual therapy evaluative frameworks. The implicit area deals with the role of clinical decision making and critical thinking in manual therapy in education and rehabilitation. In the null (unaddressed) area of manual therapy, we suggest directions for future development and research.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed1998

Craniosacral rhythm: reliability and relationships with cardiac and respiratory rates.

Craniosacral rhythm (CSR) has long been the subject of debate, both over its existence and its use as a therapeutic tool in evaluation and treatment. Origins of this rhythm are unknown, and palpatory findings lack scientific support. The purpose of this study was to determine the intra- and inter-examiner reliabilities of the palpation of the rate of the CSR and the relationship between the rate of the CSR and the heart or respiratory rates of subjects and examiners. The rates of the CSR of 40 healthy adults were palpated twice by each of two examiners. The heart and respiratory rates of the examiners and the subjects were recorded while the rates of the subjects' CSR were palpated by the examiners. Intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to determine the intra- and inter-examiner reliabilities of the palpation. Two multiple regression analyses, one for each examiner, were conducted to analyze the relationships between the rate of the CSR and the heart and respiratory rates of the subjects and the examiners. The intraexaminer reliability coefficients were 0.78 for examiner A and 0.83 for examiner B, and the interexaminer reliability coefficient was 0.22. The result of the multiple regression analysis for examiner A was R = 0.46 and adjusted R2 = 0.12 (p = 0.078) and for examiner B was R = 0.63 and adjusted R2 = 0.32 (p = 0.001). The highest bivariate correlation was found between the CSR and the subject's heart rate (r = 0.30) for examiner A and between the CSR and the examiner's heart rate (r = 0.42) for examiner B. The results indicated that a single examiner may be able to palpate the rate of the CSR consistently, if that is what we truly measured. It is possible that the perception of CSR is illusory. The rate of the CSR palpated by two examiners is not consistent. The results of the regression analysis of one examiner offered no validation to those of the other. It appears that a subject's CSR is not related to the heart or respiratory rates of the subject or the examiner.

Adult↗