RT info:eu-repo/semantics/article
T1 Is craniosacral therapy effective? A systematic review and meta-analysis
A1 Ceballos Laita, Luis
A1 Ernst, Edzard
A1 Carrasco Uribarren, Andoni
A1 Cabanillas Barea, Sara
A1 Esteban Pérez, Jaime
A1 Jiménez del Barrio, Sandra
K1 Craniosacral therapy
K1 Terapia craneosacral
K1 Osteopathic medicine
K1 Osteopatía
K1 Complementary Therapies
K1 Alternative medicine
K1 Medicina alternativa
K1 Systematic reviews (Medical research)
K1 Medicina - Investigación
K1 Meta-analysis
K1 Medicine
K1 Public health
K1 32 Ciencias Médicas
K1 3212 Salud Publica
AB Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of craniosacral therapy (CST) in the management of any conditions. Methods: Two independent reviewers searched the PubMed, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Osteopathic Medicine Digital Library databases in August 2023, and extracted data from randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating the clinical effectiveness of CST. The PEDro scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool were used to assess the potential risk of bias in the included studies. The certainty of the evidence of each outcome variable was determined using GRADEpro. Quantitative synthesis was carried out with RevMan 5.4 software using random effect models. Data Synthesis: Fifteen RCTs were included in the qualitative and seven in the quantitative synthesis. For musculoskeletal disorders, the qualitative and quantitative synthesis suggested that CST produces no statistically significant or clinically relevant changes in pain and/or disability/impact in patients with headache disorders, neck pain, low back pain, pelvic girdle pain, or fibromyalgia. For non-musculoskeletal disorders, the qualitative and quantitative synthesis showed that CST was not effective for managing infant colic, preterm infants, cerebral palsy, or visual function deficits. Conclusions: The qualitative and quantitative synthesis of the evidence suggest that CST produces no benefits in any of the musculoskeletal or non-musculoskeletal conditions assessed. Two RCTs suggested statistically significant benefits of CST in children. However, both studies are seriously flawed, and their findings are thus likely to be false positive.
PB MDPI
SN 2227-9032
YR 2024
FD 2024
LK https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/70207
UL https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/70207
LA eng
NO Healthcare, 2024, Vol. 12, Nº. 6, 679
NO Producción Científica
DS UVaDOC
RD 22-ene-2025