Cargando…

Survey based investigation into general practitioner referral patterns for spinal manipulative therapy

BACKGROUND: In the UK Physiotherapy, Chiropractic and Osteopathy are all statutory regulated professions. Though guidelines have supported the use of Spinal Manipulative Therapy (SMT) for low back pain (LBP), General Practitioners (GP) referral patterns to the 3 registered professions that perform S...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kier, Annabel, George, Matthew, McCarthy, Peter W
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3668299/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23718217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2045-709X-21-16
_version_ 1782271612477767680
author Kier, Annabel
George, Matthew
McCarthy, Peter W
author_facet Kier, Annabel
George, Matthew
McCarthy, Peter W
author_sort Kier, Annabel
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In the UK Physiotherapy, Chiropractic and Osteopathy are all statutory regulated professions. Though guidelines have supported the use of Spinal Manipulative Therapy (SMT) for low back pain (LBP), General Practitioners (GP) referral patterns to the 3 registered professions that perform SMT are generally unknown. METHOD: A short questionnaire was designed and piloted. Demographic information, patient referral to SMT and the GPs own personal utilisation of SMT were obtained. 385 GP’s were contacted representing approximately 20% of the GP’s in Wales Autumn 2007. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: 182 (50.8%) completed questionnaires were returned. Profile characteristics: 2/3 of respondents were male, 79% were 40 years old or older (statistically reflective of the total population of GPs in Wales at that time) and 62% had 20 years or less in practise. Personal use of SMT by GP’s: 48 respondents had sought SMT treatment and a further 56% of those that had not previously sought SMT indicated that they would consider doing so. Patient referral to SMT by GP’s: 131 respondents (72%) had referred patients to SMT and of those who had not a further 13% would consider referring. The general referral pattern and utilisation pattern was Physiotherapy: Osteopathy: Chiropractic. 21% who had never referred patients neither had, nor would consider it for themselves. A small subgroup appeared to manage personal choice differently from patient referral: 5 individuals who had not referred patients either had or would consider it for themselves and 23 of the group that would refer patients neither had nor would seek it for themselves. CONCLUSIONS: This limited investigation indicates that GP’s do practise consistently with guidelines on back pain and utilise SMT as a care option. Although the main option for referral was physiotherapy, slightly over 40% of respondents who expressed a preference would refer to either osteopathy or chiropractic, or both in preference to physiotherapy. There was a small proportion that did not and would not refer patients for SMT regardless of personal use of SMT; these suggested use of acupuncture. Further investigation is needed to determine the alternatives to SMT offered to patients and the decision-making criteria for patient referral to subtypes of SMT practitioner.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3668299
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36682992013-06-01 Survey based investigation into general practitioner referral patterns for spinal manipulative therapy Kier, Annabel George, Matthew McCarthy, Peter W Chiropr Man Therap Research BACKGROUND: In the UK Physiotherapy, Chiropractic and Osteopathy are all statutory regulated professions. Though guidelines have supported the use of Spinal Manipulative Therapy (SMT) for low back pain (LBP), General Practitioners (GP) referral patterns to the 3 registered professions that perform SMT are generally unknown. METHOD: A short questionnaire was designed and piloted. Demographic information, patient referral to SMT and the GPs own personal utilisation of SMT were obtained. 385 GP’s were contacted representing approximately 20% of the GP’s in Wales Autumn 2007. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: 182 (50.8%) completed questionnaires were returned. Profile characteristics: 2/3 of respondents were male, 79% were 40 years old or older (statistically reflective of the total population of GPs in Wales at that time) and 62% had 20 years or less in practise. Personal use of SMT by GP’s: 48 respondents had sought SMT treatment and a further 56% of those that had not previously sought SMT indicated that they would consider doing so. Patient referral to SMT by GP’s: 131 respondents (72%) had referred patients to SMT and of those who had not a further 13% would consider referring. The general referral pattern and utilisation pattern was Physiotherapy: Osteopathy: Chiropractic. 21% who had never referred patients neither had, nor would consider it for themselves. A small subgroup appeared to manage personal choice differently from patient referral: 5 individuals who had not referred patients either had or would consider it for themselves and 23 of the group that would refer patients neither had nor would seek it for themselves. CONCLUSIONS: This limited investigation indicates that GP’s do practise consistently with guidelines on back pain and utilise SMT as a care option. Although the main option for referral was physiotherapy, slightly over 40% of respondents who expressed a preference would refer to either osteopathy or chiropractic, or both in preference to physiotherapy. There was a small proportion that did not and would not refer patients for SMT regardless of personal use of SMT; these suggested use of acupuncture. Further investigation is needed to determine the alternatives to SMT offered to patients and the decision-making criteria for patient referral to subtypes of SMT practitioner. BioMed Central 2013-05-29 /pmc/articles/PMC3668299/ /pubmed/23718217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2045-709X-21-16 Text en Copyright © 2013 Kier et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Kier, Annabel
George, Matthew
McCarthy, Peter W
Survey based investigation into general practitioner referral patterns for spinal manipulative therapy
title Survey based investigation into general practitioner referral patterns for spinal manipulative therapy
title_full Survey based investigation into general practitioner referral patterns for spinal manipulative therapy
title_fullStr Survey based investigation into general practitioner referral patterns for spinal manipulative therapy
title_full_unstemmed Survey based investigation into general practitioner referral patterns for spinal manipulative therapy
title_short Survey based investigation into general practitioner referral patterns for spinal manipulative therapy
title_sort survey based investigation into general practitioner referral patterns for spinal manipulative therapy
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3668299/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23718217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2045-709X-21-16
work_keys_str_mv AT kierannabel surveybasedinvestigationintogeneralpractitionerreferralpatternsforspinalmanipulativetherapy
AT georgematthew surveybasedinvestigationintogeneralpractitionerreferralpatternsforspinalmanipulativetherapy
AT mccarthypeterw surveybasedinvestigationintogeneralpractitionerreferralpatternsforspinalmanipulativetherapy