Effect of osteopathic manipulative treatment and Bio-Electro-Magnetic Energy Regulation (BEMER) therapy on generalized musculoskeletal neck pain in adults
Author:
Palmer Genevieve M.1, Dominick Nicholas1, Kane Melissa1, Bawek Sawyer1, Burch Blake1, Sanders Taylor1, Phrathep Davong, Myers Nicole2, Lorenzo Santiago3
Affiliation:
1. Osteopathic Research Department , Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine , Bradenton , FL , USA 2. Assistant Professor, Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine , Bradenton , FL , USA 3. Associate Professor, Physiology , Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine , Bradenton , FL , USA
Abstract
Abstract
Context
General neck pain is a prevalent complaint made by patients to their physicians and is often of a suspected musculoskeletal origin. Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is a form of manual therapy utilized by osteopathic physicians and some allopathic physicians to treat a broad variety of musculoskeletal ailments, including neck pain. Bio-Electro-Magnetic Energy Regulation (BEMER) is an emerging therapeutic modality that deploys a biorhythmically defined stimulus through a pulsed electromagnetic field and has been shown to reduce musculoskeletal pain. Studies on these treatments have independently yielded promising results. Therefore, it is possible that the utility of OMT and BEMER can produce an additive improvement in the treatment of neck pain.
Objectives
The objectives of this study are to investigate the individual and combined effects of OMT and BEMER therapy on neck pain in adults.
Methods
Adults with nonspecific neck pain were recruited for the study. A total of 44 participants met the study inclusion criteria and were randomized into one of four study groups: OMT-only, BEMER-only, OMT+BEMER, or CONTROL (light touch and sham). Forty subjects completed the study, and data for 38 participants were included in our analyses. An OMT and BEMER protocol were specifically designed for this study under the guidance of a licensed osteopathic physician. Participants underwent intervention for a duration of 3 weeks. Data were obtained through baseline and postintervention assessments utilizing three surveys: Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and Short Form 12-item Health Survey (SF-12, divided into Mental and Physical). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) analysis was performed retrospectively on pre- and postintervention absolute means between study groups. Significance was set at p<0.05.
Results
One-way ANOVA analysis demonstrated a statistically significant difference in pre- vs. postintervention mean scores between BEMER and CONTROL (p<0.05), BEMER compared to OMT (p<0.005), and BEMER compared to BEMER+OMT (p<0.05), in the NDI. The OMT+BEMER group reported an average reduction in pain on the VAS of 21.3 (±29.3) points, or a 65.0 % reduction of pain. A similarly substantial decrease in pain was reported in the BEMER study group, which showed a 46.2 % reduction in pain from baseline. The OMT and CONTROL study groups only reported a 2.9 and 23.9 % decrease, respectively. The BEMER and OMT+BEMER study groups also demonstrated a reduction in subjective reporting on the NDI, by 53.8 and 26.3 %, respectively. The BEMER study group also achieved the most substantial improvement in mental and physical well-being as reported by the SF-12.
Conclusions
Study arms that incorporated BEMER yielded improvements on the NDI, VAS, and SF-12, indicating benefits to BEMER regarding improved overall functionality in routine daily activities as well as a reduction in nonspecific neck pain. Perceived pain, as demonstrated on the VAS, was seemingly improved in an additive fashion from the BEMER group to the OMT+BEMER group, although the results did not achieve statistical significance. Further study with greater participation could provide additional insight.
Funder
This study was funded by the Internal Seed Grant through Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine for BEMER device and participant compensation
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Subject
Complementary and alternative medicine,Complementary and Manual Therapy
Reference25 articles.
1. Wang, H, Naghavi, M, Allen, C, Barber, RM, Bhutta, ZA, Carter, A, et al.. Global, regional, and national life expectancy, all-cause mortality, and cause-specific mortality for 249 causes of death, 1980–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet 2016;388:1459–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(16)31012-1. 2. Côté, P, Cassidy, JD, Carroll, L. The Saskatchewan Health and Back Pain Survey. The prevalence of neck pain and related disability in Saskatchewan adults. Spine 1998;23:1689–98. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199808010-00015. 3. Fejer, R, Kyvik, KO, Hartvigsen, J. The prevalence of neck pain in the world population: a systematic critical review of the literature. Eur Spine J 2006;15:834–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-004-0864-4. 4. Hoy, DG, Protani, M, De, R, Buchbinder, R. The epidemiology of neck pain. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2010;24:783–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.berh.2011.01.019. 5. Maccagnano, J. Urgent evaluation of traumatic neck pain. J Urgent Care Med. 2016;11–14.
|
|