Dear Issac
I both use and favour CTM and find it an ivaluable method of dealing with
frank autonomic disturbances. How thin the evidence is depends very much on
what you feel thick is. There is some decent studies regarding CTM
specifically and many more giving a good backing to the scientific
rationale.
I investigated its use in my MSc dissertation for LBP and got some
favourable data. I would be happy to share with you my reference list if you
think it might help. Please send me an email with your personal one and I'll
send it. It is several pages long and I do not want to irritate the list in
general. Finally it is a touch out of date as I completed to project 2 years
ago.
Regards Kevin Reese PT UK
----- Original Message -----
From: Neumann Isaac Rutger, Granheim
<[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2000 9:40 AM
Subject: Connective Tissue Massage
>
> Going on about evidence based PT, belief, etc... Kaushik send me a mail in
> which he mentioned Connective Tissue Massage. Who on this mailserver
> practices this? The evidence for CTM is thin, but still it's a part of the
> (regulalar) Dutch PT-education.
>
> About evidence-based PT.
> I think that some part of PT are very suitable for evidence basing
(correct
> english?:)), and others less or not. A few weeks ago I started as a PT on
a
> lungtrainingscentre and I discovered that it difficult to find good RCT
> about lung-PT that apply for my patients: manual chest percussion for
> example... how long, where, with a flat hand or not. And what if the
patient
> is really fat? Does it help in that case? And what if the PT has small
> hands? Etc, etc. Same thing for PEP (positive expiratory pressure): how
many
> times a day, which patients, how hard should they blow, etc, etc.
> In some articles I read: we compared standard lung-PT with bla, bla, bla
> without explaining what standard lung-PT is or only WHAT and not how long,
> which position, etc.
> No, ... for me lung-PT is more empiry-based than evidence-based.
>
> For other parts of PT evidence-basing is easier I guess. Orthopedic
problems
> without the involvment of inner organs for example. Hundred healty persons
> with an ankle sprain. Should be that hard to find out what is best in a
good
> RCT. Don't you people agree.
>
> Isaac
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|