背景:传统医学的局限性和对补充医学的兴趣日益增加,需要仔细研究手动医学的潜在相关性,特别是儿童整骨手法治疗(OMT)。
目的:对新生儿托儿所接受OMT的婴儿与未接受OMT的婴儿进行回顾性观察性试验研究,通过量化他们生命最初6个月的门诊健康问题,并确定进一步进行类似性质的确定性随机对照试验的可行性。
方法:回顾性图表回顾了58对配对儿童的儿科临床记录,其中一半的人接受OMT作为他们的常规新生儿护理的一部分,根据他们的医生“呼叫”分配给提交人。选择病例匹配对照组的样本是接受常规同种疗法新生儿护理而没有OMT的婴儿。两组均在同一学术门诊接受儿科护理,未接受进一步的OMT。
方法:门诊患者论文图表回顾包括以下变量点的表格:提到吐痰/呕吐,透气性,食物不耐受,烦躁/失眠,建议或诊断为绞痛,中耳炎发作,使用抗生素的频率,上呼吸道感染的频率,下呼吸道问题的频率,腹泻,和皮疹,按报告变量的访问月份分开。
结果:通过皮尔逊卡方的探索性分析得出两组之间的一些统计学差异,支持OMT治疗组,包括第2个月的食物不耐受(X=4.14,P=.04),第3个月建议绞痛(X21=4.14,P=.04),第5个月吐痰/呕吐(X21=8.59,P=0.003),和第5个月抗生素使用情况(X21=6.33,P=0.012)。
结论:研究结果表明,对新生儿给予OMT可以对婴儿的短期和长期健康产生积极影响,因此需要在这一领域进行进一步研究。特别与胃肠道投诉和烦躁有关。其他研究将受益于各种方法的改变,包括OMT给药时间与可能症状的相关性,以及这些症状在更长的观察时间内的变化,以及解剖学骨病发现与特定症状的相关性。
BACKGROUND: Limitations of traditional medicine and rising interest in complementary medicine call for a closer look at the potential relevance of manual medicine, specifically osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) in children.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a retrospective observational pilot study of babies who received OMT in the newborn nursery compared to those who did not, by quantifying their outpatient health issues in the first 6 months of life, and to determine the feasibility of further definitive randomized controlled trials of a similar nature.
METHODS: Retrospective chart review of the first 6 months of life from pediatric clinic records of 58
case-matched pairs of children, half of whom received OMT as part of their routine newborn care by virtue of their physician \"call\" assignment to the author. The sample from which the
case-matched control group was chosen were babies who had received routine allopathic newborn care without OMT. Both groups received their pediatric care in the same academic ambulatory clinic and received no further OMT.
METHODS: Outpatient paper chart review consisted of tabulation by points of the following variables: mention of spitting/vomiting, gassiness, food intolerance, irritability/sleeplessness, colic suggested or diagnosed, episodes of otitis media, frequency of antibiotics given, frequency of upper respiratory infections, frequency of lower respiratory problems, diarrhea, and rashes, separated by month of visit in which the variable was reported.
RESULTS: Exploratory analysis by Pearson Chi-square yielded a few statistically significant differences between the 2 groups, in favor of the OMT-treated group, including Month 2 food intolerance (Χ21 = 4.14, P = .04), Month 3 colic suggested (Χ21 = 4.14, P = .04), Month 5 spitting/vomiting (Χ21 = 8.59, P = .003), and Month 5 antibiotic usage (Χ21 = 6.33, P = .012).
CONCLUSIONS: Findings point to the need for further research in this area based on the suggestion that OMT given to a newborn can positively affect that baby\'s short-term and quite possibly long-term health, specifically related to GI complaints and irritability. Other studies would benefit from a variety of methodologic changes, including correlation of timing of administration of OMT with possible symptoms and changes in those symptoms over longer periods of observation, as well as correlation of anatomic osteopathic findings with specific symptoms.