Association between cervical and thoracic somatic dysfunction among second-year osteopathic medical students.

CONTEXT: The ubiquitous nature of cervical and thoracic somatic dysfunction requires osteopathic physicians to have a strong working knowledge of regional spinal mechanics and their functional and dysfunctional interrelationships. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether cervical and thoracic somatic dysfunction occur concomitantly, particularly somatic dysfunction of the occipitoatlantal (OA) and upper thoracic (T1-T4) region of the spine. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of cervical and thoracic somatic dysfunction prevalence diagnosed by faculty in second-year osteopathic medical students was conducted. Somatic dysfunction was defined as a vertebral unit possessing any of the following palpatory characteristics: tissue texture changes, asymmetry of motion and relative position, restriction of motion, or tenderness (ie, TART criteria). For each instance of somatic dysfunction diagnosed, the segmental level identifying the superior segment of the involved vertebral unit was recorded, as well as the spinal region (ie, cervical [OA, atlantoaxial (AA), and C2-C7] or thoracic [T1-T12]). Descriptive analyses, a Pearson χ(2) test, and a regression model using an analysis of variance were performed on the data. RESULTS: Among 338 students included in the study, the following 5 vertebral segments were found to have the highest prevalence of somatic dysfunction: OA (257 [76.0%]), C3 (257 [76.0%]), T3 (247 [73.1%]), T5 (226 [66.9%]), and T4 (223 [66.0%]). A Pearson χ(2) test of association between the OA vertebral segment and the following segments were found to be statistically significant: AA (P=.024), C2 (P=.032), and T4 (P=.045). An analysis of variance revealed statistical significance between the prevalence of upper cervical (OA, AA, C2) somatic dysfunction and the prevalence of upper thoracic (P<.001) and midthoracic (T5-T8) (P<.001) somatic dysfunction; the prevalence of lower cervical (C3-C7) (P=.74) and lower thoracic (T9-T12) (P=.085) somatic dysfunction was not found to be significant. CONCLUSION: A statistically significant association between cervical somatic dysfunction and thoracic somatic dysfunction was confirmed. In addition, there was a statistically significant association between dysfunction of the OA and the AA, C2, and T4 vertebral segments. These results suggest that the number of dysfunctional vertebral segments in the upper thoracic and midthoracic spinal regions is directly proportional to the number of dysfunctional segments found in the upper cervical spinal region.

Efficacy of osteopathic manipulative treatment for low back pain in euhydrated and hypohydrated conditions: a randomized crossover trial.

CONTEXT: Low back pain (LBP) affects up to 85% of all persons at some time in life and is a condition for which osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) has been shown to be beneficial. Measures that can improve the efficacy of OMT would further benefit patients; one such measure, hydration status, was explored in this study. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there is a relationship between a patient's hydration status before OMT for LBP and the outcome of that treatment. DESIGN: A randomized, single-blind crossover study conducted from March to December 2010. SETTING: Outpatient academic center. PARTICIPANTS: Eight women and 11 men with LBP of 1 to 12 months duration. INTERVENTIONS: Both euhydrated and hypohydrated conditions were achieved in each participant by modifying water consumption for 36 hours before OMT sessions. PARTICIPANTS received 2 sessions of OMT, each in a different hydration condition and with a 1-week washout period in between. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pre- and posttreatment visual analog scale scores for pain, number and severity of somatic dysfunction as scored on the somatic dysfunction severity scale, and number of asymmetric landmarks found on the osteopathic standing structural examination. RESULTS: Improvements in total and severe number of lumbar somatic dysfunction (P=.001 and P=.013, respectively) and number of asymmetric landmarks on standing structural examination (P=.002) were found to be greater in the euhydrated vs the hypohydrated condition. PARTICIPANTS had a mean of 2 fewer areas of posttreatment somatic dysfunction when euhydrated than when hypohydrated, and they had a mean decrease of 2 asymmetric landmarks on the standing structural examination when euhydrated but none when hypohydrated. Osteopathic manipulative treatment improved self-reported pain immediately after treatment regardless of hydration status. CONCLUSION: Outcome measures improved for all participants, with greater improvement observed after participants were treated in the euhydrated condition than when in the hypohydrated condition. It is reasonable for clinicians to recommend that patients increase their hydration to optimize treatment.