Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment: Counterstrain Procedure - Cervical Vertebrae

Michael O. Bazzi, Shane R. Sergent, Michael O. Bazzi, Shane R. Sergent

Excerpt

Neck pain is a frequent complaint among the general population and may be attributed to improper posture, inadequate sleep positioning, an acute injury, among other causes. It has been reported that about half of all individuals will suffer from neck pain at some point in their life. While numerous treatment options exist for neck pain, only a handful of patients seek osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT).

OMT remains one of the staples of the osteopathic medical school curriculum and is widely used among practicing osteopathic physicians today for the treatment of neck pain and other musculoskeletal pain. As one of the more gentle techniques within the scope of OMT, strain-counterstrain (SCS), also known as positional release therapy, is an effective and safe alternative treatment option for patients experiencing cervical pain. Despite little research being conducted on this technique, SCS has been utilized clinically by osteopathic physicians for over a half-century.The technique has shown promise in patients who have failed to achieve relief of symptoms from other treatment methods. Among the approximately 25 OMT techniques that exist, SCS was reported as the fourth most commonly used by a survey of osteopathic providers. Aside from cervical pain, SCS can be used to treat several medical conditions, especially those involving the musculoskeletal system.

Founded in 1955 by Lawrence H. Jones, D.O., the strain-counterstrain (SCS) model has been primarily utilized by osteopathic physicians as a procedure performed to aid in the diagnosis and indirect treatment of a patient's somatic dysfunction. Diagnosis is achieved through a pain scale and tissue texture abnormalities found at associated myofascial tenderpoints (TPs). Examples of tissue texture abnormalities include asymmetry, restriction, changes in tone, or temperature. As an indirect technique, SCS attempts to move the affected region in the direction opposite of the restrictive barrier. Treatment is performed by positioning the patient to achieve spontaneous tissue release while the physician simultaneously monitors the TP. In essence, the TP should be relieved by placing the patient in a position-of-comfort, holding this position for 90 seconds, and slowly returning the patient to a neutral position. SCS, along with all OMT techniques, aims to reduce pain, enhance function, and improve a patient's quality of life. This review will discuss the use of SCS, particularly involving the cervical vertebrae.

The basic steps required to perform strain-counterstrain (SCS) in any region of the body are as follows:

  1. Find a TP.

  2. Assess the tenderness using a pain scale.

  3. Passively and gently place the patient in a position-of-comfort that results in the greatest reduction of tenderness at the TP. Approximate the position first, then fine-tune through small arcs of movement. Aim to achieve at least 70% tenderness reduction, with the goal of 100%.

  4. Maintain the position for 90 seconds while continuing to monitor the patient's TP.

  5. Passively return the patient to a neutral position.

  6. Re-test for tenderness at the TP.

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure: Michael Bazzi declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

Disclosure: Shane Sergent declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

Copyright © 2023, StatPearls Publishing LLC.

References

    1. Klein R, Bareis A, Schneider A, Linde K. Strain-counterstrain to treat restrictions of the mobility of the cervical spine in patients with neck pain: a sham-controlled randomized trial. Complement Ther Med. 2013 Feb;21(1):1-7.
    1. Wong CK, Abraham T, Karimi P, Ow-Wing C. Strain counterstrain technique to decrease tender point palpation pain compared to control conditions: a systematic review with meta-analysis. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2014 Apr;18(2):165-73.
    1. Brose SW, Jennings DC, Kwok J, Stuart CL, O'Connell SM, Pauli HA, Liu B. Sham manual medicine protocol for cervical strain-counterstrain research. PM R. 2013 May;5(5):400-7.
    1. Dardzinski JA, Ostrov BE, Hamann LS. Myofascial pain unresponsive to standard treatment: successful use of a strain and counterstrain technique with physical therapy. J Clin Rheumatol. 2000 Aug;6(4):169-74.
    1. Snider KT, Glover JC, Rennie PR, Ferrill HP, Morris WF, Johnson JC. Frequency of counterstrain tender points in osteopathic medical students. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2013 Sep;113(9):690-702.
    1. Johnson SM, Kurtz ME. Osteopathic manipulative treatment techniques preferred by contemporary osteopathic physicians. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2003 May;103(5):219-24.
    1. Bogduk N, Mercer S. Biomechanics of the cervical spine. I: Normal kinematics. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2000 Nov;15(9):633-48.
    1. Rong X, Liu Z, Wang B, Chen H, Liu H. The Facet Orientation of the Subaxial Cervical Spine and the Implications for Cervical Movements and Clinical Conditions. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2017 Mar 15;42(6):E320-E325.
    1. Wong CK. Strain counterstrain: current concepts and clinical evidence. Man Ther. 2012 Feb;17(1):2-8.
    1. Letchuman R, Gay RE, Shelerud RA, VanOstrand LA. Are tender points associated with cervical radiculopathy? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Jul;86(7):1333-7.

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe