Effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment on children with plagiocephaly in the context of current pediatric practice: a retrospective chart review study.

CONTEXT: Deformational plagiocephaly (DP) is on the rise in pediatric patients. The current standard of care recommended for management is repositioning with possible addition of cranial orthoses. However, strong data are lacking to support these recommendations. Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is another treatment option for DP that is also lacking evidential support. OBJECTIVES: This retrospective chart review study investigated the effects of OMT at restoring a more symmetrical cranial bone configuration in children with DP. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on medical records of patients with a diagnosis of DP from three private practices over a 4-year period from September 2017 to December 2021. Inclusion criteria were diagnoses of DP by a referring physician and aged 10 months or less at the time of initial evaluation and treatment. Patients were excluded if they had confounding diagnoses such as genetic syndromes or severe torticollis. A total of 26 patients met these criteria, and their records were reviewed. The main outcome reviewed was anthropometric assessment of the cranium, mainly the cranial vault asymmetry index (CVAI). RESULTS: Participants demonstrated a mean CVAI - a measure that determines the severity of DP - of 6.809 (±3.335) (Grade 3 severity) at baseline, in contrast to 3.834 (±2.842) (Grade 2 severity) after a series of OMT treatments. CVAI assessment after OMT reveals statistically significant (p≤0.001) decreases in measurements of skull asymmetry and occipital flattening. No adverse events were reported throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: The application of OMT has shown potential benefit for reducing cranial deformity in patients with DP.

Natural Supplements for COVID19-Background, Rationale, and Clinical Trials.

Worldwide, the turmoil of the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has generated a burst of research efforts in search of effective prevention and treatment modalities. Current recommendations on natural supplements arise from mostly anecdotal evidence in other viral infections and expert opinion, and many clinical trials are ongoing. Here the authors review the evidence and rationale for the use of natural supplements for prevention and treatment of COVID-19, including those with potential benefit and those with potential harms. Specifically, the authors review probiotics, dietary patterns, micronutrients, antioxidants, polyphenols, melatonin, and cannabinoids. Authors critically evaluated and summarized the biomedical literature published in peer-reviewed journals, preprint servers, and current guidelines recommended by expert scientific governing bodies. Ongoing and future trials registered on clinicaltrials.gov were also recorded, appraised, and considered in conjunction with the literature findings. In light of the controversial issues surrounding the manufacturing and marketing of natural supplements and limited scientific evidence available, the authors assessed the available data and present this review to equip clinicians with the necessary information regarding the evidence for and potential harms of usage to promote open discussions with patients who are considering dietary supplements to prevent and treat COVID-19.

Analysis of State Insurance Coverage for Nonpharmacologic Treatment of Low Back Pain as Recommended by the American College of Physicians Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: In 2017, the American College of Physicians (ACP) released guidelines encouraging nonpharmacologic treatment of chronic low back pain (LBP). These guidelines recommended utilization of treatments including multidisciplinary rehabilitation, acupuncture, mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), tai chi, yoga, progressive relaxation, biofeedback, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and spinal manipulation. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine status of insurance coverage status for multiple nonpharmacological pain therapies based on the 2017 Essential Health Benefits (EHB) benchmark plans across all states. METHODS: The 2017 EHB benchmark plans represent the minimum benefits required in all new policies in the individual and small group health insurance markets and were reviewed for coverage of treatments for LBP recommended by the ACP guidelines. Additionally, plans were reviewed for limitations and exclusionary criteria. RESULTS: In nearly all state-based coverage policies, chronic pain management and multidisciplinary rehabilitation were not addressed. Coverage was most extensive (supported by 46 states) for spinal manipulation. Acupuncture, massage, and biofeedback were each covered by fewer than 10 states, while MBSR, tai chi, and yoga were not covered by any states. Behavioral health treatment (CBT and biofeedback) coverage was often covered solely for mental health diagnoses, although excluded for treating LBP. CONCLUSION: Other than spinal manipulation, evidence-based, nonpharmacological therapies recommended by the 2017 ACP guidelines were routinely excluded from EHB benchmark plans. Insurance coverage discourages multidisciplinary rehabilitation for chronic pain management by providing ambiguous guidelines, restricting ongoing treatments, and excluding behavioral or complementary therapy despite a cohesive evidence base. Better EHB plan coverage of nondrug therapies may be a strategy to mitigate the opioid crisis. Recommendations that reflect current research-based findings are provided to update chronic pain policy statements.