Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 20, 2026

Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment as a Useful Adjunctive Tool for Pneumonia
Published on: May 6, 2014
Osteopathic manipulative medicine among injured emergency department patients: a nationwide study
Hanna Harris1, Aviya DiStefano1, Kaitlin M Bowers1
1Department of Emergency Medicine, Jerry M. Wallace School of Osteopathic Medicine, Campbell University, Lillington, NC, USA.
Context:
Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) encompasses a wide range of diagnostic and treatment techniques for many conditions, but few studies have evaluated OMT use on injured patients.
Objectives:
We aimed to describe the use of OMT on injured patients from a nationwide sample of emergency department (ED) encounters.
Methods:
We performed a retrospective analysis of the 2018-2022 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS) datasets. We included all ED encounters with an injury diagnosis as well as an osteopathic diagnosis or treatment, including International Classification of Diseases - Tenth Revision (ICD-10) Clinical Modification (CM) codes M9900-M9909, ICD-10 Procedure Coding System (PCS) codes 7W00X07-7W09X9Z, and Current Procedural Terminology/Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (CPT/HCPCS) codes 98925-98929. We calculated the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and the predicted probability of injury-related in-hospital mortality for each encounter utilizing the ROCmax method. Except for counts, all statistics at the encounter level are weighted to account for the complex survey design.
Results:
Among 29,966,447 ED encounters with an injury diagnosis within the study period, we identified 1,686 with at least one osteopathic diagnosis or treatment code, 6.0 per 100k injury encounters (95 % confidence interval [CI] 4.2 to 8.2). A minority of encounters (574 [35.5 %]) were at level 1 or 2 trauma centers. Although 677 (39.7 %) were admitted, the median ISS was only 1 (interquartile range [IQR 1, 4]), and only 62 (2.9 %) had computed tomography (CT) orders. The predicted probability of injury-related mortality was low, 1.5 % (IQR 1.3, 2.0). Most encounters had a somatic dysfunction diagnosis without an osteopathic treatment code, 1,239 (75.9 %). The most common site of injury, as well as the body area with somatic dysfunction diagnosis and osteopathic treatment, was the thorax.
Conclusions:
In this nationwide sample, few injured ED patients received OMT, the majority only received a somatic dysfunction diagnosis without osteopathic treatment, and most had minor injuries. These results offer real-world insights into the use of OMT among injured ED patients and may inform efforts to promote its adoption.
More Related Videos
07:52Expired CO2 Measurement in Intubated or Spontaneously Breathing Patients from the Emergency Department
Published on: January 29, 2011
04:05Author Spotlight: Unveiling Prognostic Indicators in Heart Failure - The Role of Phase Angle and Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis
Published on: June 30, 2023
Related Concept Videos
13:27Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment as a Useful Adjunctive Tool for Pneumonia
07:52Expired CO2 Measurement in Intubated or Spontaneously Breathing Patients from the Emergency Department
04:05Clinical Application of Phase Angle and BIVA Z-Score Analyses in Patients Admitted to an Emergency Department with Acute Heart Failure
09:52Setting Up a Stroke Team Algorithm and Conducting Simulation-based Training in the Emergency Department - A Practical Guide
06:05Enema of Traditional Chinese Medicine for Patients with Severe Acute Pancreatitis
11:05SECONDs Administration Guidelines: A Fast Tool to Assess Consciousness in Brain-injured Patients