Public perception of osteopathic manipulative medicine as an effective treatment for musculoskeletal disorders.

Abstract

Context: Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are among the most prevalent causes of disability globally, contributing significantly to diminished quality of life and rising healthcare costs. While pharmacological treatments and physical therapy remain standard, alternative modalities such as osteopathic manipulative medicine (OMM) have emerged as promising nonpharmacologic options. However, public awareness of OMM remains limited, and misconceptions persist, particularly regarding its distinction from chiropractic care. This study aimed to assess public perception of OMM and its effectiveness in treating MSDs, with the goal of informing strategies to enhance understanding and utilization of osteopathic principles.

Objectives: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the public's perception, awareness, and experiences with OMM in the treatment of MSDs, and to identify knowledge gaps that can be addressed through educational outreach. This study also examined how demographic and socioeconomic factors influence awareness and utilization of OMM. Insights gained will guide the development of targeted educational materials to enhance public understanding, to promote the distinctiveness of osteopathic medicine, and to clarify the role of OMM in MSD care.

Methods: A nationwide, web-based cross-sectional survey was conducted targeting US adults aged 18 years and older. Demographic data collected included age, location, race, ethnicity, income, marital and employment status, and number of children. The survey, administered through Random Device Engagement (RDE) methodology, was distributed within mobile apps to a randomized sample of users who opted in through nonmonetary incentives. Questions assessed knowledge of OMM, previous experiences with osteopathic care, perceived effectiveness in managing MSDs, and interest in nonpharmacological treatments. Quantitative analysis included frequency distributions and descriptive statistics to characterize awareness, perceptions, and utilization of OMM.

Results: A total of 174 valid responses were analyzed after the exclusion of incomplete entries. Respondents represented a demographically diverse population across the United States. The most frequently cited uses of OMM were for back pain (n=70, 40.2 %), neck pain (n=58, 33.3 %), arthritis (n=38, 21.8 %), and chronic pain (n=33, 19.0 %). Regarding effectiveness, 68 respondents (39.1 %) rated OMM as "Very Effective," and 30 (17.2 %) rated it as "Extremely Effective." The key benefits included pain relief, improved mobility, reduced medication use, and noninvasiveness. Awareness of osteopathic distinctiveness remained low, with many respondents conflating OMM with chiropractic care.

Conclusions: Findings highlight a favorable perception of OMM among those familiar with its use in MSD management, yet widespread knowledge gaps persist among the general public. The data support the need for targeted educational efforts that promote OMM as a safe, effective, evidence-based alternative to pharmacologic interventions. This work strengthens the case for broader integration of osteopathic principles in mainstream care and underscores the importance of outreach in reinforcing osteopathic distinctiveness. Future steps will involve the development of educational materials to address misconceptions and improve access to OMM services.