Research lines

OSTEOPATHIC DIAGNOSTIC TESTS

Remember the need to objectify the results

Correlation with radiology. Others: espirometry, goniometry, etc.

Tests in bold type have been published in international publications, although all tests should be studied, without exception, given the level of proof.

CENTRAL REGION (RACHIS, RIBS AND PELVIS)

• Cervical spine

1. Jackson test
2. Distraction test
3. Klein test
4. “Quick scanning” test : VALIDATED
5. Mitchell test
6. Test for anterior aspects (hypomobility)
7. "Quick scanning" test
8. Mitchell test
9. Analytical mobility test
10. Gaenslen test
11. Drum test
12. "Quick scanning" test
13. Counter pressure (major lesion)
14. Ring test (pressure on the cheeks)
15. Mitchell test
16. Analytical mobility tests
17. Functional dissymmetry – anatomical dissymmetry correlation
18. Fabere-Patrick test
19. A-P and lateral compression test
20. Gillet test: VALIDATED
21. Palpation position radiological correlation
22. Thumbs up: VALIDATED
23. Downing test : VALIDATED
24. Thompson test (elongation)
25. “Sitting” test  half short-half long
26. Hip drop test : VALIDATED
27. Standing Flexion Test (Standing thumbs raised test): VALIDATED
28. Lateroflexion test
29. Gynaecological lift test
30. Flexion-extension test
31. Coughing test
32. Sutherland breathing test
33. Derefield test
34. Sitting flexion test (Sitting thumbs raised test)
35. Gillet test
36. Ballistic test with lumbar spine and pelvis
37. Betcherew test
38. Compression test of the sciatic nerve
39. Linder test and Milgram test
40. Pheasan test and Nachlas test
41. Lasègue test (SLR): VALIDATED
42. Mitchell test
43. Glide tests
44. "Quick scanning" test
45. Springing test
46. Breathing test
47. Costal-corporal test
48. Costal-transverse test
49. Diaphragm test (palpation inspiration-expiration)
50. Relationship dermalgia, activated sclerotoma, radiology
51. Valsalva test and similar tests
52. Roger Bikelas test

• Thoracic spine

• Lumbar spine

• SIJ

• Sacrum

• Sciatica

• Ribs

• Others

LIMBS

• Shoulder:
  • Glenohumeral
    • A-P glide: VALIDATED
    • Cranial-caudal glide: VALIDATED
    • Gilchrist test (palm raised test)
    • Jobe test
    • Hawkins test
    • Neer test
    • Adson test
    • Eden test
    • Wright test: VALIDATED
  • Acromioclavicular
    • A-P glide
    • Restriction in the rotations
  • Sternal-costal-clavicular
    • Mobility associated with the cervical spines
  • Omothoracic
    • Palpation-radiology correlation
    • Glide restrictions
• Elbow
  • A-P glide of the radius head
  • Rotation of the ulna
  • Elbow laterality test
• Wrist and fingers
  • A-P glide of the radiocarpal joint
  • A-P glide of the carpal bones
  • Phalen test and similar tests
  • Tinel’s Sign
  • A-P glide, rotation and decompression of the fingers
• Hip
  • A-P glide
  • Rotations test
• Knee:  Orthopaedics (ligamentary and meniscal) well-studied. Osteopathic
  • A-P glide of the upper tibio-fibula
  • Ankle flexion-extension test for the superior tibio-fibula joint
  • Laterality test
  • Anterior-posterior box test
  • Knee rotation test
• Foot:
  • Compression-decompression test of the tibio-tarsal joint
  • A-P glide test of the tibio-tarsal joint
  • A-P glide test of the lower tibio-fibular joint
  • A-P glide test of the subastragalar joint: VALIDATED
  • Mobility test of the calcaneus: VALIDATED
  • Cuboid bone test
  • Scaphoid test
  • Piano key test of the metatarsals
• TMJ
  • Open mouth test: VALIDATED
  • Protusion/retrusion test
  • Diduction test

EFFECTS OF OSTEOPATHIC TECHNIQUES

In any case, the research lines will depend on the material and patients available.

Somatic dysfunction:

• There are some research lines published by different authors, such as the AOA, but this is an extraordinary line (difficult to follow) to define models and theories about articular somatic dysfunction, understood as a clinical entity which needs treatment.

Manipulation and spine:

• Pain and range of movement, evoked potentials, EMG and temperature have been studied.
• Good research lines about stability (there are some published but not in depth), reflexes, dermalgias, viscera-somatic reflexes, etc. and analytical ones about interventions (the current articles use generic manipulations).

Peripheral manipulation:

• Very fertile field for research, since there is little scientific evidence studied.
• Range of movement, pain, EMG, etc. needs to be studied.
• The drawback is the placing of publications according to the acquired importance of other treatments (e.g. surgery), although there may be place in the medium term.

Visceral manipulation:

• Deserted field in international publications and those concerning the impact of manual therapy (despite the work by Barral and the American school).
• Assessment questionnaires about the quality of life exist in some visceral dysfunctions (e.g. dyspepsia), but they should be supported by more complex analyzes (contrast radiology, pH analyzes, blood tests, etc.).
• The study of viscero-somatic reflexes is interesting, since they have prior medical references. With the appropriate material, this may open possibilities (e.g.  eye pumping technique).

Cranial manipulation:

• Field open to all possibilities, but complex in the methods of evaluating the effects and in scientific publication.
• Craniosacral rhythm is under study but there are many detractors worldwide.
• Working with the sensitive points may be more straightforward at first than cranial biomechanics.