Abstract
Objectives To describe the development of the NCOR Research Network, the first osteopathic Practice-Based Research Network (PBRN) in the UK, and provide data on its members’ characteristics, clinical practices, and patient demographics.
Design Cross-sectional survey study.
Setting Online survey of osteopaths practising in the United Kingdom.
Participants 570 osteopaths registered with the General Osteopathic Council who consented to participate in the NCOR Research Network.
Primary and secondary outcome measures Demographic characteristics of osteopaths, details of their clinical practice, patient demographics, common presenting complaints, treatment approaches, and attitudes towards evidence-based practice.
Results The median age bracket of participants was 50-59 years, with 55% identifying as women. Participants had a median of 17 years of clinical experience. Most worked in private practice (71% as principals, 32% as associates), seeing 20-39 hours of patients per week. The majority (87%) regularly treated adults aged 65 or older. Low back pain was the most common complaint seen daily (56%). Spinal articulation/mobilization (79%) and soft tissue massage (78%) were the most frequently used techniques. Participants reported positive views towards evidence-based practice but cited lack of research skills and time as barriers to engagement.
Conclusions The NCOR Research Network provides a foundation for future osteopathic research in the UK. While the sample was not fully representative of UK osteopaths, it offers insights into current osteopathic practice. The network aims to foster collaboration between clinicians and academics, potentially bridging the gap between research and practice in osteopathy.
Protocol registration https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/HPWG4
Article summary Strengths and limitations of this study:
This study establishes the first osteopathic Practice-Based Research Network (PBRN) in the UK, providing a novel infrastructure for collaborative research in osteopathy.
The survey was developed based on previous PBRN studies and existing UK osteopathic datasets, allowing for comparability of data across different research initiatives.
A diverse recruitment strategy was employed, including various channels such as the regulatory body, professional organisations, and both face-to-face and online presentations, to reach a wide range of osteopaths.
The sample in this study is not fully representative of the UK osteopathic profession when compared to the General Osteopathic Council registrant data, which may limit the generalisability of the findings.
As the survey data were self-reported by osteopaths, the findings may be subject to recall or social desirability biases.
Competing Interest Statement
Competing interests statement: The Osteopathic Foundation (Charity that funded this project) is a stakeholder of the National Council for Osteopathic Research. JDR and CF have received grants from the Osteopathic Foundation. JDR provides research expertise to the Osteopathic Foundation for grant application review. JDR, CF and DB receive salaries from the National Council for Osteopathic Research (NCOR) hosted by Health Sciences University (HSU). JDR and DB are registrant members of the General Osteopathic Council (GOsC).
Clinical Protocols
https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/HPWG4
Funding Statement
Funding statement: This project received funding from the Osteopathic Foundation. The funder did not have any specific role in the conceptualisation, design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval was received from the University College of Osteopathy Research Ethics Committee (#21122023).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data sharing statement: data are presented in the tables of the manuscript. For any queries, please contact NCOR directly (info{at}ncor.org.uk).
