Osteopathy

Joyce Cristina Freitas et al. (2026) · Lasers in medical science

This randomized, sham-controlled trial with 48 physically active young men (45 analyzed for performance, aged 18 to 35) at a Brazilian university explored whether photobiomodulation (PBM) and osteopathic manipulation (OM) change recovery after exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD). PBM applies red light from light-emitting diodes to the skin, a process the authors link to mitochondrial energy production in muscle fibers. OM is a manual therapy; here it meant high-velocity low-amplitude thrusts, quick, small-range joint manipulations. EIMD is the inflammation, strength loss and raised creatine kinase (CK, an enzyme leaking from damaged muscle fibers) that follow unaccustomed jumping or lowering exercise, usually peaking 24 to 72 hours later. Participants were randomized to placebo, PBM, OM, or PBM plus OM, 12 per group. PBM meant a 650 nm red light device pressed against 16 points on the right thigh and calf (144 joules in total, about 8 minutes). OM meant a lumbar roll and a pelvic manipulation by an osteopath. Both were given once before 100 drop jumps from a 50 cm platform, with sham versions for blinding. CK, quadriceps strength, knee flexibility and horizontal jump distance were measured before, right after, and at 24, 48 and 72 hours. The groups did not differ statistically on any outcome (CK group effect p = 0.950; strength p = 0.283; jump p = 0.199, meaning no measurable difference between the four arms). Within groups, CK rose immediately after exercise in placebo (p = 0.01) and OM (p = 0.02), but only at 24 hours in PBM and PBM plus OM, and the combined group showed a significant fall by 72 hours (p = 0.001, suggesting faster clearance of the damage marker). Strength dropped 6.3% to 12.4% after exercise; in exploratory tests the combined group regained significant strength by 48 hours (p = 0.036) and sat 1.4% from baseline. Jump distance rose 8.5 to 11.9 cm in all groups. CK did not track functional recovery. No adverse events were reported. The authors describe a possible modest, complementary benefit of combining the two approaches, while labeling the strength trend exploratory and non-significant. Limitations include 12 participants per group, a single session, only young men, red light that penetrates tissue less deeply than near-infrared light, and no formal check of blinding. Findings apply to physically active young men under acute jumping stress. The authors propose testing other light wavelengths and doses, repeated sessions, and a broader osteopathic approach in future trials.

Rita Chiaramonte et al. (2026) · The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy

This systematic review of 18 randomized controlled trials explored whether hands-on treatment eases pain and improves jaw movement in adults with temporomandibular disorders (TMD). TMD is a group of conditions affecting the jaw joint, the chewing muscles and nearby tissues, and it is estimated to affect about 31% of adults. Its subtypes include muscle pain (myalgia), disc displacement (the cushioning disc slips out of position, sometimes locking the jaw) and joint pain. Manual therapy covers thrust manipulation, soft-tissue release, massage and intra-oral techniques, delivered by physiotherapists, chiropractors, osteopaths, dentists and physicians. The review asked which techniques help most and whether results differ by profession. Researchers searched four databases through March 2025 and screened 561 records, keeping 18 trials of adults with a clinical TMD diagnosis. Trials compared manual therapy with sham treatment, no treatment, splints, medication, exercise or education. Pain was rated on the visual analogue or numeric rating scale (0 to 10), and maximum mouth opening was measured in millimetres. Risk of bias was checked with the Cochrane tool and certainty with GRADE. Because the trials differed so widely in technique, dose, comparator and follow-up, results were summarized in words rather than pooled statistically. Most trials reported short-term pain reduction and wider mouth opening, but certainty was low to moderate for pain and low for mouth opening. High-velocity low-amplitude (HVLA) thrusts made up 56% of interventions and fascial manipulation with myofascial release made up 37.5%. Dry needling plus upper neck HVLA beat splint therapy, diclofenac and joint mobilization at three months (p < 0.001), and intra-oral therapy kept benefits for one year in chronic jaw-muscle pain. Upper thoracic HVLA showed no significant effect (p > 0.05), and jog manipulation gained only 6.86 mm of mouth opening at first visit with no later group difference. Massage and fascial manipulation by physiotherapists were linked to relief of jaw-muscle symptoms, while chiropractic, osteopathic and dental trials also reported gains. Physiotherapy trials were the most numerous, which the authors attribute to publication volume rather than superior effectiveness. The authors describe manual therapy as associated with short-term benefit and treat professional comparisons as descriptive, since profession was tangled with setting, technique and country. Limitations include small samples, short follow-up, mixed diagnoses, English-only searching and no meta-analysis. Safety findings were not reported in pooled form, and the evidence mostly covers weeks to months rather than years. The authors call for larger trials with longer follow-up and standardized protocols, and they state that manual therapy is best delivered by trained, licensed professionals.