Samantha DeMarsh1, Anneliese Huntzinger2, Alison Gehred3, Joseph R Stanek4, Kathi J Kemper5, Jennifer A Belsky6. 1. Pediatric Residency and samantha.demarsh@nationwidechildrens.org. 2. Pediatric Residency and. 3. Grant Morrow III Library, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio. 4. Department of Hematology and Oncology and. 5. Department of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio; and. 6. Department of Hematology/Oncology/BMT, Riley Hospital for Children, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Abstract
CONTEXT: A common reproach precluding the use of osteopathic manipulative medicine (OMM) in pediatrics is a lack of evidence regarding its safety, feasibility, and effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic, scoping review of pediatric osteopathic medicine to identify gaps in the literature and make recommendations for future research. DATA SOURCES: We searched 10 databases using 6 key words and medical subject heading terms for any primary articles reporting OMM use in children published from database inception until initiation of the study. STUDY SELECTION: Articles were selected if they reported primary data on OMM conducted in the United States on patient(s) 0 to 18 years old. DATA EXTRACTION: Baseline study characteristics were collected from each article and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations system was used to critically appraise each study. RESULTS: Database search yielded 315 unique articles with 30 studies fulfilling inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of these, 13 reported the data required to demonstrate statistically significant results, and no significant adverse events were reported. The majority of studies were graded as providing weak clinical evidence because of significant methodologic flaws and biases. LIMITATIONS: The review was limited to US-based studies and reports. Minimal discrepancies between reviewers were resolved via an objective third reviewer. CONCLUSIONS: There is little strong, scientific, evidence-based literature demonstrating the therapeutic benefit of OMM for pediatric care. No strong clinical recommendations can be made, but it can be medically tolerated given its low risk profile. High-quality, scientifically rigorous OMM research is required to evaluate safety, feasibility, and efficacy in pediatrics.
CONTEXT: A common reproach precluding the use of osteopathic manipulative medicine (OMM) in pediatrics is a lack of evidence regarding its safety, feasibility, and effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic, scoping review of pediatric osteopathic medicine to identify gaps in the literature and make recommendations for future research. DATA SOURCES: We searched 10 databases using 6 key words and medical subject heading terms for any primary articles reporting OMM use in children published from database inception until initiation of the study. STUDY SELECTION: Articles were selected if they reported primary data on OMM conducted in the United States on patient(s) 0 to 18 years old. DATA EXTRACTION: Baseline study characteristics were collected from each article and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations system was used to critically appraise each study. RESULTS: Database search yielded 315 unique articles with 30 studies fulfilling inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of these, 13 reported the data required to demonstrate statistically significant results, and no significant adverse events were reported. The majority of studies were graded as providing weak clinical evidence because of significant methodologic flaws and biases. LIMITATIONS: The review was limited to US-based studies and reports. Minimal discrepancies between reviewers were resolved via an objective third reviewer. CONCLUSIONS: There is little strong, scientific, evidence-based literature demonstrating the therapeutic benefit of OMM for pediatric care. No strong clinical recommendations can be made, but it can be medically tolerated given its low risk profile. High-quality, scientifically rigorous OMM research is required to evaluate safety, feasibility, and efficacy in pediatrics.
Authors: Ramon Cases-Solé; David Varillas-Delgado; Marta Astals-Vizcaino; Óscar García-Algar Journal: Front Behav Neurosci Date: 2022-03-15 Impact factor: 3.558