The Italian Osteopathic Practitioners Estimates and RAtes (OPERA) study: How osteopaths work.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
22
12
2019
accepted:
18
06
2020
entrez:
3
7
2020
pubmed:
3
7
2020
medline:
12
9
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The scope of practice of the osteopathic profession in Italy is underreported. The first part of the present study investigated the Italian osteopaths' profile, focusing on the socio-demographic information and geographical distribution together with the main characteristics of their education. The OPERA-IT study highlighted that the majority of respondents declared to work as sole practitioners (58.4%), while the remaining declared to work as part of a team. Since teamwork and networking are recognized as fundamental aspects of healthcare, the present study aims to compare the osteopathic practice, diagnostic and treatment modalities of osteopaths who work as a sole practitioner and osteopaths who work as part of a team to highlight possible differences. Moreover, patients' characteristics will be presented. The OPERA-IT study population was chosen to provide a representative sample. A web campaign was set up to inform the Italian osteopaths before the beginning of the study. The OPERA IT study used a previously tested questionnaire. The questionnaire was translated into Italian following the World Health Organization recommendation. The questionnaire was composed of 57 items grouped in five sections, namely: socio-demographics, osteopathic education and training, working profile, organization, and management of the clinical practice and patient profile. The survey was delivered online through a dedicated platform. The survey was completed by 4,816 individuals. Osteopaths who work as sole practitioners represented the majority of the sample (n = 2814; 58.4%). Osteopaths who work as part of a team declared to collaborate mostly with physiotherapists (n = 1121; 23.3%), physicians with speciality (n = 1040; 21.6%), and other osteopaths (n = 943; 19.6%). The two groups showed heterogeneous characteristics. Significative differences were observed in all the factors, namely: geographical distribution, age, gender, training, working contract and working place, daily consultations and time for each consultation, fees, and the average waiting period to book an appointment. The principal component analysis supported a ten-component model and explained 80.5% of the total variance. The analysis showed that osteopaths working as sole practitioners have an increased probability (OR = 0.91; CI 95%: 0.88-0.94; p<0.01) of using systemic diagnostic and treatment techniques and have distinct clinical features with higher probability (OR = 0.92; 0.88-0.96; p<0.01) of spending less time with patients, being paid less but treating a higher number of patients per week. The most represented patients' age groups were 41-64 years old (n = 4452; 92.4%) and 21-40 years old (n = 4291; 89.1%). Similarly, the most reported new patients' age groups were 41-64 years old (n = 4221; 87.7%) and 21-40 years old (n = 3364; 69.9%). The most common presenting complaints were back pain, neck pain, cervical radiculopathy, sciatica, shoulder pain, and headaches. Osteopathic practice in Italy seems to be characterised by interprofessional collaboration, mostly with physiotherapists. Our results highlighted two different profiles in terms of sociodemographic characteristics and work modalities between osteopaths who work as sole practitioners and those who work as part of a team. Although according to the respondents, people of all ages consult Italian osteopaths, the majority of patients are adults. Most of them have been referred to osteopathy by other patients or acquaintances. Patients seek osteopathic care mostly for musculoskeletal related complaints.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32615581
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235539
pii: PONE-D-19-35428
pmc: PMC7332305
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0235539Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Acad Med. 2011 Nov;86(11):1351
pubmed: 22030650
Man Ther. 2014 Apr;19(2):125-30
pubmed: 24139392
Eval Health Prof. 1999 Jun;22(2):208-20
pubmed: 10557856
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2006 Jun;29(5):349-53
pubmed: 16762661
Am Psychol. 2018 May-Jun;73(4):433-450
pubmed: 29792459
J Foot Ankle Res. 2015 Feb 05;8(1):2
pubmed: 25670968
BMJ Open. 2018 Sep 1;8(8):e023770
pubmed: 30173163
Med Teach. 2012;34(2):e78-101
pubmed: 22289015
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013 Aug 01;14:227
pubmed: 23915239
Crit Care Clin. 1993 Jul;9(3):443-53
pubmed: 8353783
J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2002 Oct;102(10):527-32, 537-40
pubmed: 12401039
Med Teach. 2009 Jan;31(1):1-12
pubmed: 19253148
BMC Complement Altern Med. 2018 Apr 11;18(1):129
pubmed: 29642901
J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2016 Mar;116(3):136-43
pubmed: 26927907
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 25;14(1):e0211353
pubmed: 30682169
PLoS Med. 2010 Aug;8(8):e1001069
pubmed: 21829330
Health Aff (Millwood). 2008 May-Jun;27(3):759-69
pubmed: 18474969
J Interprof Care. 2014 Jul;28(4):376-8
pubmed: 24617846
J Allied Health. 2010 Fall;39 Suppl 1:196-7
pubmed: 21174039
PLoS One. 2014 Sep 03;9(9):e106259
pubmed: 25184204
Nurs Stand. 2001 Jan 31-Feb 6;15(20):33-7
pubmed: 12211865
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 May 10;18(1):352
pubmed: 29747647
J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2013 Oct;113(10):754-67
pubmed: 24084802