>From different posts on this topic, it appears that many readers are not
familiar with how this started. The paper being referred to (by whoever
began this) is:
Cherkin DC, Deyo RA, Battie M, Street J, Balow W: A Comparison of
Physical Therapy, Chiropractic Manipulation, and Provision of a
Educational Booklet for the Treatment of Patients with Low Back Pain.
New England Journal of Medcine, 339:1021-1029, 1998.
This paper has come under considerable criticism, from both
chiropractors and physical therapists, for many reasons. From the PT
standpoint, the paper's title is misleading, because the only physical
therapy given was the McKenzie technique. In other words, regardless of
what was found on physical evaluation, only McKenzie exercises were
given. Nothing else. The APTA, however, has been talking about the fact
that this physical therapy was shown just as effective as chiropractic
manipulation. But from the real-life standpoint, does McKenzie technique
define physical therapy? There are other "problems" with the paper, so I
suggest reading it in detail.
And a Happy, Healthy New Year to all.
Neil Spielholz
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|