Effects of manual osteopathic interventions on psychometric and psychophysiological indicators of anxiety, depression and stress in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Objectives To evaluate whether osteopathic and related manual interventions improve adult mental health (depression, anxiety, stress) and psychophysiological measures (eg, heart rate variability, skin conductance).Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).Data...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2025-02-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Open |
| Online Access: | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/15/2/e095933.full |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Objectives To evaluate whether osteopathic and related manual interventions improve adult mental health (depression, anxiety, stress) and psychophysiological measures (eg, heart rate variability, skin conductance).Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).Data sources PubMed, MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, Cochrane, and AMED, searched through September 2024.Eligibility criteria English-language RCTs with ≥30 participants investigating osteopathic or related manual therapies (eg, myofascial release, high-velocity low-amplitude thrusts) delivered by qualified practitioners, compared with no treatment or sham, and reporting immediate postintervention mental health or psychophysiological outcomes.Data extraction and synthesis Full-text screening, risk-of-bias assessment and data extraction were conducted independently by multiple reviewers using a standardised Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Extraction Form. Risk of bias was assessed using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist. For meta-analyses, Hedges’ g (with 95% CIs) was calculated from postintervention means and SD. Random-effects models accounted for heterogeneity, and prediction intervals were calculated to assess uncertainty in effect estimates.Results 20 RCTs were included. Osteopathic interventions reduced depression (Hedges’ g=−0.47, 95% CI: −0.86 to –0.09, p=0.02) and increased skin conductance (Hedges’ g=0.67, 95% CI: 0.00 to 1.34, p=0.05). Depression improvements were greater in pain populations (Hedges’ g=−0.61, 95% CI: –1.06 to –0.17, p=0.01). However, wide prediction intervals and moderate heterogeneity indicate uncertainty in true effect sizes, and limited studies and sample sizes restrict assessment of publication bias.Conclusions Osteopathic and related manual therapies may reduce depression and influence certain psychophysiological markers, particularly in pain populations, but uncertainty and heterogeneity limit confidence. More rigorous, larger, and longitudinal RCTs are needed.Trial registration number This meta-analysis was not formally registered, though the protocol and search strategy can be found at Open Science Framework, registration identification: https://osf.io/jrtpx/. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2044-6055 |