Prospective observational study of vital sign stability and safety of Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment (OMT) in neonates

Abstract

Context: Despite various publications demonstrating efficacy of osteopathic manipulative therapy (OMT) in neonates, no studies have formally assessed the safety of OMT in this population. Objective: To determine the safety of OMT in term neonates (gestational age ≥ 37 weeks) and preterm neonates (gestational age ≤ 36 6/7 weeks). Safety was assessed using two mechanisms: 1) comparison of vital signs before and after OMT, and 2) monitoring for adverse events including emesis, cyanosis, apnea or decreased level of consciousness during OMT and for 30 minutes following OMT. Methods: A prospective observational design was used to analyze preand post-OMT measurements of temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate and oxygen saturation. Osteopathic physicians performed an osteopathic structural exam followed by OMT using techniques such as osteopathy in the cranial field, balanced ligamentous tension and myofascial release. Adverse events were documented by a research coordinator who observed the subject directly during OMT and for 30 minutes after OMT. Results: Thirty term and 13 preterm infants were recruited for this study. The mean gestational age at birth for the term infants was 37.8 weeks and 32.5 weeks for the preterm infants. The mean gestational age at the time of treatment was 40.0 weeks for the term population and 34.9 weeks for the preterm population. In both term and pre-term infants, the temperature decreased by a statistically significant 0.1°C following OMT. Heart rate decreased by 4 beats per minute (bpm) in term subjects and by 5 bpm in preterm subjects. Respiratory rate was unchanged in term infants and increased slightly in preterm infants. There was no change in oxygen saturations for either term or preterm infants. There were no adverse events in either group. Conclusion: The stability of vital signs preand post-OMT and absence of adverse events in this study suggest that OMT is a safe intervention to perform in healthy, term neonates. However, due to lower than anticipated recruitment of preterm neonates, safety cannot be formally declared for this population. *Correspondence to: Alexa Craig, Department of Pediatrics, Maine Medical Center, Portland, Maine, USA, E-mail: craiga@mmc.org Received: November 10, 2020; Accepted: December 15, 2020; Published: December 21, 2020 Introduction There is a small but growing body of evidence to support the efficacy of Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment (OMT) in preterm and term infants [1-6]. Osteopathic Medicine is a comprehensive system able to both diagnose and treat somatic dysfunctions through the refined skill of manual palpation [7]. Techniques commonly used in neonates include osteopathy in the cranial field (OCF), balanced ligamentous tension (BLT) and myofascial release (MFR) [7]. Through these techniques, OMT has been shown to improve efficiency of breast feeding [6], to reduce gastrointestinal symptoms [5], and to diminish infant colic [3]. Other studies have shown decreased length of stay (LOS) in OMT treated preterm newborns [1,4] and in a multi-center, randomized, single-blind, parallel group clinical trial in Europe, use of OMT in babies born from 29-37 weeks showed decreased hospital LOS by 3.9 days in multivariate analysis [2]. Treatments such as OMT can be considered low cost and high value given that it requires no highly specialized equipment, location or support staff, is a relatively low risk procedure, and has immense potential benefits, not limited to decreased hospital LOS. Such an intervention could be of critical importance in NICUs where cost and duration of hospitalization continue to increase. Despite these trends, the implementation and routine use of OMT is widely variable; some hospitals treat every newborn admitted [8,9], while others have no OMT program or providers. While many of the studies have reported no adverse events during OMT, to our knowledge there has not been an investigation done that specifically addresses the overall safety of the use of OMT in newborns as a primary outcome. The goal of this study was to assess the safety of OMT as a therapeutic intervention for preterm and term infants by comparing preand post-OMT vital signs, as well as through careful documentation of any adverse events during and after OMT. Beinlich A (2020) Prospective observational study of vital sign stability and safety of Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment (OMT) in neonates Volume 5: 2-5 Pediatr Dimensions, 2020 doi: 10.15761/PD.1000211 Methods The study was reviewed and approved by the Maine Medical Center’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) in Portland, Maine. Written and informed consent was obtained from the subject’s parent(s) prior to enrollment by an experienced research coordinator who had completed training for protection of human subjects. Term (≥ 37 weeks) and preterm (≤ 36 6/7 weeks) infants were identified for the study through OMT consultations which are routinely ordered on a clinical basis for infants in the newborn nursery and NICU to assess issues including poor feeding, irritability, gastrointestinal symptoms or abnormal muscle tone. Infants were excluded from eligibility in the setting of critical illness, medical instability, a suspected or confirmed genetic syndrome, hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, high grade intraventricular hemorrhage (Grade III or IV) or cystic periventricular leukomalacia. The primary outcome of the study was a comparison of preand post-OMT vital signs (temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate and oxygen saturation) to establish safety of OMT in neonates. The secondary outcome was the frequency of adverse clinical events including emesis, cyanosis, apnea, bradycardia or decreased level of consciousness during treatment and for 30 minutes thereafter. The research coordinator directly observed the infant during and after OMT for these adverse outcomes. Apnea was defined as an episode of cessation of breathing for 20 seconds or longer, or a shorter respiratory pause associated with bradycardia, cyanosis, pallor and/or marked hypoxia [10]. Bradycardia was defined as below normal heart rate for age range; specifically, a normal range for infants from birth to three months ranged from the 1st percentile of 107 bpm to the 99th percentile of 181 bpm [11]. Each infant subject received one osteopathic manipulative treatment with vital signs recorded immediately preand post-treatment. These vital signs were done explicitly for the purpose of the investigation. Infants may have had additional subsequent OMT; such treatments were not included in this study. Vital sign measurements, including temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate and oxygen saturation were obtained by the infant’s nurse and recorded by the research coordinator. Temperature was recorded from the infant’s axilla; heart rate was recorded from 3-lead EKG monitoring along with respiratory rate and oxygen saturation. No vitals were recorded during OMT. Prior to OMT, an osteopathic structural exam (OSE) was performed to assess the following regions: head, cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine, rib cage, pelvis and sacrum. The infant was then treated with standard OMT techniques including, but not limited to, MFR, BLT and OCF. These techniques were implemented as described in existing OMT literature [7,12]. OSEs and OMT for this study were performed by two board certified OMM/NMM osteopathic physicians. Following treatment, the research coordinator observed the infant for adverse events. The research coordinator worked with NICU staff to coordinate OMT with daily cares. Parents were encouraged to be present for the OMT if they desired. Descriptive statistics were used to report the clinical characteristics of the cohort. The mean heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation and temperature preand post-treatment were compared using a student t-test for paired samples. Pre-and post-OMT vital signs were plotted online graphs for each participant. A power calculation was performed based on retrospective vital sign data recovered from the electronic medical record for infants treated with OMT. Based on these data, it was anticipated that there would be no statistically significant difference between the pre-treatment and post-treatment vital signs. With a sample size of 27 term infants and 27 preterm infants, a paired t-test with a 0.05 one-sided significance level would have 80% power to reject the null hypothesis that the test and standard are not equivalent (i.e., that the difference in means is one half the standard deviation, or farther from zero in the same direction) in favor of the alternative hypothesis-that the means in the two groups are equivalent (i.e., the expected mean difference is 0).