Table 4

Stratified results.

No. of Subjects

Model

No. of

Contrasts

OMT

Control

Effect

Size

95% CI

P

OMT vs. Active Treatment or Placebo Control

Median contrasts

Fixed-effects model*

6

193

142

-0.26

-0.48 – -0.05

.02

Random-effects model

6

193

142

-0.26

-0.48 – -0.05

.02

Best-case scenario

6

174

132

-0.34

-0.57 – -0.11

.004

Worst-case scenario

6

183

134

-0.07

-0.29 – 0.16

.54

Median contrasts, one OMT vs control treatment comparison per trial

Gibson [43] active treatment

5

154

109

-0.33

-0.58 – -0.08

.01

Gibson [43] placebo control

5

155

115

-0.26

-0.51 – -0.02

.03

Median contrasts, Cleary [47] trial excluded

5

185

138

-0.24

-0.47 – -0.02

.03

All contrasts

16

534

400

-0.21

-0.34 – -0.08

.002

OMT vs. No Treatment Control

All contrasts

4

193

120

-0.53

-0.76 – -0.30

<.001

Trials Performed in the United Kingdom

Median contrasts

Fixed-effects model*

4

105

84

-0.29

-0.58 – 0.00

.050

Random-effects model

4

105

84

-0.30

-0.63 – 0.02

.06

Best-case scenario

4

105

88

-0.36

-0.64 – -0.07

.01

Worst-case scenario

4

100

83

-0.11

-0.40 – 0.19

.48

Median contrasts, one OMT vs control treatment comparison per trial

Gibson [43] active treatment

3

66

51

-0.46

-0.83 – -0.09

.02

Gibson [43] placebo control

3

67

57

-0.30

-0.66 – 0.05

.10

Median contrasts, Cleary [47] trial excluded

3

97

80

-0.26

-0.56 – 0.04

.09

All contrasts

10

294

247

-0.23

-0.40 – -0.06

.01

Trials Performed in the United States

Median contrasts

Fixed-effects model*

4

213

147

-0.31

-0.52 – -0.10

.004

Random-effects model

4

213

147

-0.32

-0.57 – -0.06

.01

Best-case scenario

4

188

132

-0.38

-0.61 – -0.16

.001

Worst-case scenario

4

198

138

-0.22

-0.44 – 0.00

.050

Median contrasts, one OMT vs control treatment comparison per trial

Licciardone [46] placebo control

3

171

130

-0.24

-0.47 – -0.01

.04

Licciardone [46] no treatment control

3

181

128

-0.36

-0.59 – -0.14

.002

All contrasts

10

433

273

-0.33

-0.48 – -0.18

<.001

Short-Term Follow-Up

Median contrasts

Fixed-effects model*

5

181

130

-0.28

-0.51 – -0.06

.01

Random-effects model

5

181

130

-0.31

-0.61 – -0.01

.046

Best-case scenario

5

196

142

-0.41

-0.62 – -0.19

<.001

Worst-case scenario

5

181

136

-0.10

-0.32 – 0.12

.38

All contrasts

9

357

258

-0.23

-0.39 – -0.07

.01

Intermediate-Term Follow-Up

Median (all) contrasts

Fixed-effects model*

7

283

209

-0.33

-0.51 – -0.15

<.001

Random-effects model

7

283

209

-0.36

-0.63 – -0.10

.01

Median contrasts, one OMT vs control treatment comparison per trial

Gibson [43] active treatment and Licciardone [46] placebo control

5

209

161

-0.31

-0.52 – -0.10

.004

Gibson [43] active treatment and Licciardone [46] no treatment control

5

209

158

-0.45

-0.65 – -0.24

<.001

Gibson [43] placebo control and Licciardone [46] placebo control

5

209

166

-0.25

-0.46 – -0.05

.02

Gibson [43] placebo control and Licciardone [46] no treatment control

5

209

163

-0.39

-0.59 – -0.18

<.001

Long-Term Follow-Up

Median (all) contrasts

Fixed-effects model*

4

87

53

-0.40

-0.74 – -0.05

.03

Random-effects model

4

87

53

-0.41

-0.82 – -0.01

.046

Median contrasts, one OMT vs control treatment comparison per trial

Licciardone [46] placebo control

3

55

38

-0.23

-0.65 – 0.19

.28

Licciardone [46] no treatment control

3

55

34

-0.64

-1.08 – -0.20

.01

Median contrasts, Cleary [47] trial excluded

3

79

49

-0.36

-0.72 – 0.01

.054

CI denotes confidence interval; OMT, osteopathic manipulative treatment.

*Tests of homogeneity, P = .45 and P = .06 for active treatment or placebo control, and no treatment control groups, respectively; P = .32 and P = .26 for trials in the United Kingdom and the United States, respectively; and P = .14, P = .06, and P = .28 for short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term follow-up, respectively.

Licciardone et al. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2005 6:43   doi:10.1186/1471-2474-6-43