Dear Dean
Well said. Clinicians tend to ask the questions academics can help with, not
vice versa. I would say science has evolved in this manner. Clinicians dont
tend to make good researchers and vice versa, collaboration is what is
needed but rarely occurs; probably because each side feels they are more
important than the other.
When this does not happen, clinicians tend to answer valid questions poorly
or researchers give us great answers to things we do not need to know, not
understanding the clinical imperative.
Warm Regards Kevin Reese PT UK
----- Original Message -----
From: Dean Farwood <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 30 July 2000 09:55
Subject: Re: FUNCTIONAL ACTIONS?
>
>
> John Spencer wrote:[edited]
>
> >
> > I guess this discussion..........also reflects our different
backgrounds. I
> > can see your point that the most bizarre exercise, if specific to a
> > sport is 'functional' but as a physio 'functional means something else.
> >
>
> This discussion also reflects a dilemma for clinicians - caught between:
> * fanatics' claims backed by "I-see-it-work; I-don't-need
> any-scientific-validation; people-didn't-like-Stravinski-at-first-either"
> * managed care's bookkeepers telling clinicians how to practice and,
> * academics telling clinicians what terminology they should use and how
> unscientific PT is.
> The front line seems to get wider and wider as the years go by and the
patients
> get pushed farther and farther back from it.
>
> Dean Farwood, PT
> Precision Spine Training
> http://www.sirius.com/~farwood
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|