ArticleTherapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease2021
Osteopathic medicine for fibromyalgia: a sham-controlled randomized clinical trial.
Article in Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02343237 (A Multicenter, Randomized Study, Against Credible Factitious Intervention That Evaluates the Interest of Osteopathic Medicine in the Management of Fibromyalgia Syndrome), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Multicenter, Randomized Study, Against Credible Factitious Intervention That Evaluates the Interest of Osteopathic Medicine in the Management of Fibromyalgia Syndrome
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are OMERACT recommendations followed in clinical trials on fibromyalgia? A systematic review of patient-reported outcomes and their measures.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023Pooled it
- Osteopathy for Musculoskeletal Pain: A Systematic and Umbrella Review of Effectiveness and Safety.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Fibromyalgia: do I tackle you with complementary medicines?Pain reports · 2025Review
- Spinal manipulation for fibromyalgia: a narrative review.The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2025Article
- Predictors for quality of life improvement following rTMS treatment in neuropathic pain patients.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Article
- Meta-epidemiologic review: blinding and sham treatment in clinical trial design for osteopathic manipulative treatment research.International journal of osteopathic medicine : IJOM · 2024Article
- Does Osteopathic Heart-Focused Palpation Modify Heart Rate Variability in Stressed Participants with Musculoskeletal Pain? A Randomised Controlled Pilot Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- What Concept of Manual Therapy Is More Effective to Improve Health Status in Women with Fibromyalgia Syndrome? A Study Protocol with Preliminary Results.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Response to Alvarez et al.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2021Article
- Person-centeredTherapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with fibromyalgia (FM) frequently resort to osteopathic or chiropractic treatment, despite very weak supporting evidence. We aimed to assess the efficacy of osteopathic manipulation in FM in a properly controlled and powered randomized clinical trial.
methodsPatients were randomized to osteopathic or sham treatment. Treatment was administered by experienced physical medicine physicians, and consisted of six sessions per patient, over 6 weeks. Treatment credibility and expectancy were repeatedly evaluated. Patients completed standardized questionnaires at baseline, during treatment, and at 6, 12, 24, and 52 weeks after randomization. The primary outcome was pain intensity (100-mm visual analog scale) during the treatment period. Secondary outcomes included fatigue, functioning, and health-related quality of life. We performed primarily intention-to-treat analyses adjusted for credibility, using multiple imputation for missing data.
resultsIn total, 101 patients (94% women) were included. Osteopathic treatment did not significantly decrease pain relative to sham treatment (mean difference during treatment: -2.2 mm; 95% confidence interval, -9.1 to 4.6 mm). No significant differences were observed for secondary outcomes. No serious adverse events were observed, despite a likely rebound in pain and altered functioning at week 12 in patients treated by osteopathy. Patient expectancy was predictive of pain during treatment, with a decrease of 12.9 mm (4.4-21.5 mm) per 10 points on the 0-30 scale. Treatment credibility and expectancy were also predictive of several secondary outcomes.
conclusionOsteopathy conferred no benefit over sham treatment for pain, fatigue, functioning, and quality of life in patients with FM. These findings do not support the use of osteopathy to treat these patients. More attention should be paid to the expectancy of patients in FM management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.