A structured literature analysis into the evidence and clinical viability of cranial osteopathy as a treatment modality with identification of common outcome measures
Item
- Title
- A structured literature analysis into the evidence and clinical viability of cranial osteopathy as a treatment modality with identification of common outcome measures
- Author(s)
- Gibson, O
- Abstract
- Background: Cranial osteopathy (CO) is considered a CAM therapy which aims to restore health by the body’s natural self-healing mechanisms. A criterion was released in 2010 by the World Health Organization (WHO) regarding osteopathy training in the cranial field and consider it to be a valuable skill which should be part of an osteopath’s core competencies. However currently, high quality evidence supporting the efficacy of treatment in this field appears scarce and inconsistent. Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of cranial osteopathy as a treatment modality and highlight most frequent outcome measures investigated within relevant literature. To discuss the implications of the use of CO in a clinical setting and the implications within osteopathic education. Design: A structured literature review. Methods: A computerised literature search was performed using Booleans logic in PubMed, Cochrane library, Google scholar and Science direct for randomized control trials and observational studies that fit the pre-defined eligibility criteria where CO was defined as any form of treatment of the craniosacral system. The studies must have been investigating effects of CO as a treatment modality and only articles published between 01/04/2011 and 30/09/2018 were included. The quality of evidence will be assessed using the Downs & Black criteria and the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results: 15 studies met the inclusion criteria. The most commonly reported outcome measures where pain, disability and mobility/ range of motion. Overall quality of evidence was limited – moderate and the risk of bias high. Discussion: Positive results were observed throughout the majority of studies reporting on the most frequently reported outcomes alongside a variety of other conditions. Well-conducted and sound evidence on the efficacy of CO is limited with Downs & Black results varying from poor to moderate quality. Cochrane risk of bias scores were mostly high or had overall doubt regarding risk of bias. Conclusion: The most frequently reported outcomes from CO treatment in recent literature were found to be pain, mobility and disability. Although positive effects were found throughout the majority of CO intervention studies the quality of research was limited overall and the risk of bias was high. Based on current evidence the use of CO as a treatment modality does not appear scientifically viable and therefore does not adhere to EBM.
- presented at
- European School of Osteopathy
- Date Accepted
- 2019
- Date Submitted
- 19.11.2019 18:31:08
- Type
- osteo_thesis
- Language
- English
- Submitted by:
- 62
- Pub-Identifier
- 16495
- Inst-Identifier
- 1229
- Keywords
- Cranial osteopathy; Craniosacral therapy; Osteopathy in the cranial field; Treatment.
- Recommended
- 0
- Item sets
- Thesis
Gibson, O, “A structured literature analysis into the evidence and clinical viability of cranial osteopathy as a treatment modality with identification of common outcome measures”, Osteopathic Research Web, accessed May 2, 2024, https://www.osteopathic-research.com/s/orw/item/334