Kevin:
Well said. I would add the following:
When a "new" approach is being sold through continuing education courses we
should all be critical consumers. We need to ask for the references to
support the theories being presented. Initially the presenter may not have
had the time &/or resources to do the research. I do not have a problem with
that, initially. However, when the guru year after year continues to get
rich selling the course with out being a responsible professional by doing,
or sponsoring, the research then I have a big problem. I not only have a
problem with the guru but with my colleagues who attend the courses without
demanding the evidence.
I agree some things work without our understanding why, mislabeling as you
suggested, it is only through research that we will come up with the correct
labels. Our patients put their trust in us to be moral/ethical professionals
and to use all resources to get them better, they believe, rightly so, that
we are using the best evidence available when we offer them a treatment
approach. Anything less, dare say, could be malpractice.
Regards
Doug
*******************************************************
Douglas M. White, PT, OCS
Physical Therapist, Consultant
191 Blue Hills Parkway
Milton, MA USA 02186
P: 617.696.1974
[log in to unmask]
http://DouglasWhite.tripod.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "k.reese" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 4:19 AM
Subject: Re: [PHYSIO] Cranio-Sacral Therapy
> Dear All
>
> There are two reoccuring themes which present on the list when dealing
> treatments and efficacy.
>
> 1 The Drive of EBM is good but we must not think it is all encompassing.
> When we have excellent research evidence we must use it. If we do not have
> it, we should strive to produce it. In its absence use our clinical
> experience/common sense, a much under appreciated resource.
>
> 2 Techniques work clinically but perhaps not for the reasons we believe,
a
> mislabelling problem. Herb Silver addressed this point well in his last
> posting.
>
> To a degree non clinicians may have to trust clinicians where the above
grey
> areas exist in scientific knowledge. They must believe in moral/ethical
and
> professional terms that the clinician is using ALL, resources available to
> them to get the patient better. It is in no ones professional interest not
> to get patients better. There is no panacea in musculoskeletal medicine,
all
> modalities have there successes and failures. The challenge to the
clinician
> is to keep the learning impetus and refine clinical reasoning to use the
> most likely modality/cocktail of modalities, which will improve the
patients
> suffering.
>
> Hope this is not too rambly.
>
> Warm Regards Kevin Reese PT UK
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mike Barthmann <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 12:18 AM
> Subject: Re: Cranio-Sacral Therapy
>
>
> > "Douglas M. White" wrote:
> >
> > > Mike:
> > >
> > > Have you read the studies I cited? If so, what do you make of them?
> > >
> > > *******************************************************
> > >
> > > Douglas M. White, PT, OCS
> > > Physical Therapist, Consultant
> > > 191 Blue Hills Parkway
> > > Milton, MA USA 02186
> > > P: 617.696.1974
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > > http://DouglasWhite.tripod.com
> >
> > Hi Doug,
> >
> > Yes, I did read at least one of the JOSPT articles. They were written
as
> I
> > recall by people in the military who had taken some of the Upledger
> courses.
> > As I recall, the thrust of the pieces was that they used Cranial
> Technique in
> > their own practice but bemoaned the fact that there was little research
to
> > back up the science behind the concept.
> >
> > To address that particular issue I guess I would have to agree - there
is
> a
> > dearth of good research to back it all up. That is in turn a shame
> because it
> > is an enormously powerful treatment modality that finds usefulness in
the
> > management of many somatic complaints including spinal dysfunction and
> > headache complaint. Cranial suffers from the same difficulty that many
> > physiotherapy treatment approaches do - namely there's no product or
> company
> > that is likely to benefit from enquiry into this area - so nothing gets
> > done...
> >
> > There was an excellent URL on the net until about two years ago as part
of
> the
> > rhemamed site that carried back issues of "The Cranial Letter" which
> speaks
> > much more eloquently than I ever will. Sadly, that site is now down.
The
> > hard copy of the Cranial Letter is still available from the Cranial
> Academy
> > whose address is as follows:
> >
> > The Cranial Academy
> > 3500 DePauw Blvd Ste 1080
> > Indianapolis IN
> > 46268-1136
> > 317-879-0713
> >
> > The intent of my post I suppose is to stand in defense of the integrity
of
> > Cranial Technique - it's not some airy-fairy fly-by-night fad. It won't
> go
> > away - there is underlying truth to the concept. People will continue
to
> > notice its effectiveness and in good conscience will not want to deny
> their
> > patients access to the help it affords.
> >
> > My own background is not at all research based so I feel a sense of
> > frustration that I can't just thump down the proof on the table and say
> here -
> > read that. Take it on an article of faith that this is an area of
> fruitful
> > study and consideration for learned people. I use Cranial Technique in
my
> own
> > manual therapy practice and can attest to usefulness and effectiveness
of
> this
> > therapeutic modality.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Mike Barthmann
|