Evaluation of New Zealand osteopathy patients experiences of their treatment
Introduction
Osteopathy is a form of manual therapy that utilises a variety of ‘hands-on’ treatment approaches including mobilisation, manipulation and soft tissue techniques [1]. A number of systematic reviews have highlighted the role ‘structural’ osteopathy approaches may play in the management of a variety of musculoskeletal [2], [3], [4], [5] and non-musculoskeletal complaints [6]. Another treatment approach utilised by osteopaths is Osteopathy in the Cranial Field (OCF). OCF was conceived by Sutherland [7] who proposed a mechanism by which an inherent and involuntary rhythm within the body could be palpated through the manifestation of cranial bone movement. A number of studies have researched the validity of this involuntary rhythm's palpability [8], [9], and potential clinical uses [10], [11], [12], [13]. However, only a limited number of studies have investigated the patient experience of OCF [14], [15], [16].
A lack of data on patient perception and treatment outcomes associated with OCF lead Mulcahy et al. [16] to develop a questionnaire to collect and analyse patient experiential data. Originally intended only for patients receiving OCF [16], the questionnaire was later revised and condensed using both confirmatory factor analysis and Rasch analysis [17]. The questionnaire was titled the Patient Perception Measure – Osteopathy (PPM-O) and these authors suggested that it may be useful to evaluate both ‘cranial’ and ‘structural’ osteopathic treatments [15], [17]. In further work Mulcahy and Vaughan [15] also observed that the sensations patients experience during their OCF treatment may be associated with how those patients perceive their treatment. Furthermore, patient self-rated satisfaction with life also appears to be related to positive treatment perception [18], [19].
The aim of the present study was to explore the experience of patients receiving a structural treatment approach, OCF treatment approach (or both) in New Zealand osteopathy clinics. Patients' perception of treatment was explored, as well as the sensations and emotions patients experienced during and immediately after their treatment. The relationships between demographic variables, Satisfaction with Life (SWL), the Meaningfulness of Daily Activities (MDA), and patients reported experiences of treatment were also considered.
Section snippets
Methods
Ethics approval for the study was obtained from the Unitec Institute of Technology (Auckland, New Zealand) Research Ethics Committee.
Results
Thirty-nine osteopaths were identified through the recruitment search. Of those 39 osteopaths, 12 expressed interested in the study, were screened, and recruited as practitioners. A total of 230 research packs were sent to osteopaths to give to eligible patients. Of these, 107 (46.52%) completed questionnaires were returned via pre-paid post to the primary researcher at Unitec Institute of Technology. Completed questionnaires included responses from patients who indicated that they had received
Discussion
The present study is the first to report on the experiences of New Zealand patients who have received a single osteopathy treatment measured using a quantitative approach. The Patient Perception Measure - Osteopathy (PPM-O) [17] was used to evaluate patients' perceptions of their treatment.
Conclusion
The present study is the first to report on the experience of patients seeking osteopathy treatment in New Zealand. Further, there is no data on the profile of the patient seeking osteopathy treatment in New Zealand and the current study provides a basis for further work into this area. These patients report similar sensory experiences to those patients seeking OCF treatment in Australia. Understanding how patient perceptions can influence treatment outcomes is a vital part of health care and
Funding
No specific funding was received to conduct this study.
References (48)
- et al.
Osteopathic manipulative treatment for chronic nonspecific neck pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Int. J. Osteopath Med.
(2015) - et al.
Intraexaminer and interexaminer reliability for palpation of the cranial rhythmic impulse at the head and sacrum
J. Manip. Physiol. Ther.
(2001) - et al.
Item development for a questionnaire investigating patient self reported perception, satisfaction and outcomes of a single osteopathy in the cranial field (OCF) treatment
Int. J. Osteopath Med.
(2013) - et al.
Predictors of patient satisfaction
Soc. Sci. Med.
(2001) Profile of members of the Australian osteopathic association: Part 2–The patients
Int. J. Osteopath Med.
(2009)- et al.
Low back pain and kidney mobility: local osteopathic fascial manipulation decreases pain perception and improves renal mobility
J. Bodyw. Mov. Ther.
(2012) - et al.
Item development for a questionnaire investigating patient self reported perception, satisfaction and outcomes of a single osteopathy in the cranial field (OCF) treatment
Int. J. Osteopath Med.
(2013) - et al.
A profile of osteopathic practice in Australia 2010–2011: a cross sectional survey
BMC Musculoskelet. Disord.
(2013) - et al.
Osteopathic manipulative treatment for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
BMC Musculoskelet. Disord.
(2005) - et al.
Osteopathic manipulative treatment for nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BMC Musculoskelet. Disord.
(2014)
Effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative therapy for managing symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review
J. Am. Osteopath. Assoc.
The Cranial Bowl
Interexaminer reliability and cranial osteopathy
Sci. Rev. Altern. Med.
Physiological effects of a CV4 cranial osteopathic technique on autonomic nervous system function: a preliminary investigation
Int. J. Osteopath Med.
Craniosacral therapy for the treatment of chronic neck pain: a randomized sham-controlled trial
Clin. J. Pain
Comparison of gait training versus cranial osteopathy in patients with Parkinson's disease: a pilot study
NeuroRehabilitation
Application of osteopathy in the cranial field to treat left superior homonymous hemianopsia
Int. J. Osteopath Med.
An Investigation of Patient Experiences of Treatment in the Cranial Field of Osteopathy
Sensations experienced and patients' perceptions of osteopathy in the cranial field treatment
J. Evidence-based Compl. Altern. Med.
Exploring the construct validity of the Patient Perception Measure–Osteopathy (PPM-O) using classical test theory and Rasch analysis
Chiropr. Man. Ther.
Happiness unpacked: positive emotions increase life satisfaction by building resilience
Emotion
Meaningful Daily Activity and Chronic Pain
New Zealand practitioners
Cited by (4)
Investigating the current published literature where osteopathic manual therapy is used as an intervention: A scoping review
2023, International Journal of Osteopathic MedicinePatient experience, satisfaction, perception and expectation of osteopathic manipulative treatment: A systematic review
2019, International Journal of Osteopathic MedicineCitation Excerpt :Among 9 quantitative studies, 5 used a research instrument which had been assessed for its psychometric properties. Judkins et al. (2017) used the Patient Perception Measure Osteopathy (PPM-O) developed by Mulcahy & Vaughan (2015), with proven construct validity and acceptable reliability estimations at >0.80 on both sub-scales [36,54,55]. Mulcahy et al. (2014) used the Patient Perception Measure-Osteopathy in the Cranial Field (PPM-OCF) developed by themselves, with psychometric properties investigated previously by the authors with unpublished data.
Patient satisfaction and perception of treatment in a student-led osteopathy teaching clinic: Evaluating questionnaire dimensionality and internal structure, and outcomes
2019, International Journal of Osteopathic MedicineCitation Excerpt :Tied with these themes is the concept of the patient's perception of their treatment. Previous work in osteopathy has explored the patient's perception of their treatment, including sensations felt during or after treatment [18–20]. Perception also incorporates the quality of care, and the comparison between what the patient expected and what they experienced [21].