omm vs chiropractic

[lotus]

Hi,

Can someone explain the difference
between osteopathic manipulative treatment
and chiropractic treatment? ( I realize
osteopaths can do much more than
chiropractors in terms of surgery and
prescribing drugs, but what are other
differences?)

Thanks

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[UHS03]

While many of the techniques are similar, I think the main difference lies in motive. Namely, OMT is used as an adjunct to conventional medical treatment, whereas chiropractic tends to view nerve impingement as the root of disease and relieving nerve impingement as the motive for using their manipulations. OMT is more geared toward relieving muscle spasm, increasing drug efficacy (i.e. increasing blood flow), decreasing edema (i.e. mobilizing lymphatics,etc.), and freeing up limitations in a patients range of motion. I think it is fair to say that while the 2 schools of thought use very similar techniques much of the time, you may find DO's using them towards a different end than chiropracters. I am nor an expert on chiropractic by any means, so if I have misrepresented anything, I apologize.

 

[sean]

I have experienced both styles and I felt the OMM was much more subtle,although I admit I have only had one DO manipulation and a lot of chiriopractic. I was far more impressed with the OMM as I have always been uncomfortable with the speed and force involved with chiriopractic work I received.

 

[dcr]

Chiropractors primarily rely on High Velocity Low Amplitude manipulations focused mainly on the spine to relieve a whole list of problems. Some also utilize different stretches and soft tissue techniques. They, however, cannot prescribe drugs although some do dispense herbs.

As said in the previous post, Osteopaths rely on these soft tissue and joint manipulations as an adjunct therapy to other treatments found in modern medicine more common to MDs arsenal of therapies.

 

[dcdo]

Well said.