Gathering place for osteopaths
Duration of Treatment?
Out of purely idle curiosity, I wonder if there is a common duration of osteopathic treatment. Moreover, I wonder if there is a large difference between those practicing more physical manual manipulation versus those practicing more of a cranial - or other introspective approach.
The reasons for this idle curiosity are two-fold: First, I work in the US and accept payment through insurance companies & third parties. I spend 20 minutes per established patient, sometimes a little less, sometimes a little more, I also do some teaching a couple half days per week, and I see 50 patients per week on average. I am looking to possibly radically change my practice in some undetermined way, and I am curious what others are doing. Secondly, I have heard that practitioners of the Jealous "Biodynamic" school, and of the Druelle "Central Chain" style (taught at the Canadian colleges of Osteopathy), spend 1 1/2 - 2 hours per patient. This is the most time I have heard of. On the other extreme, one of my mentors spends 5 minutes per established patient (and doesn't do high velocity - but does amazing mysofascial work in that short of a time!).
I am careful not to judge; this is not set up to be a critical of any approach (just like other important things in life - faster is not always better), but I truly am curious-
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Jody Jakob on -
To think that we can overcome these problems by the time we qualify is unrealistic. But we can always make a start to help with something.....what I mean is that if we are involved in continuous learning which I suspect the majority of us are then qualfying will give us the tools to refine our practice as we go along.....I had a tutour in the clinic at the BSO who had been in practice for 10 years and told us students one day that he was just beginning to understand osteopatht/his work/helping patients.......I must admit I thought he was a bit dim or something....but after almost 35 years in practice I can happily say that I have joined the ranks of the slow learners!!
And nothing wrong with Slow Medicine....
-
Permalink Reply by Small Fry on -
Of course QM, I just find it curious that so many practitioners in many fields dwell on this problem. If you were, say, a newsagent, and a customer came in and started to create a problem in your shop - was there every day, wanted you to change your prices, product lines, decor, bothering other customers etc - you'd ask them to leave, and if they tried to gate-crash your inner life you'd make it clear they weren't welcome. You don't need postgrad newsagent school to prepare for dealing with this, you just need a clear sense of purpose.
Yet practitioners in many fields seem to have difficulty with this, and I think it's because a clear focus may be lacking - what they are offering, how they bring it about, how it works, and what is needed in order for it to work. The elephant in the room is an 'anything goes as long as it works' philosophy, which is 1990s political correctness gone differently sane. Not sure about anyone else, but when I go for treatment I want a practitioner who's clear and solid on the big picture, not one who wafts around any theory he thinks will do in the moment. I appreciate this is not the way to keep every patient, but it does help those who stay.
I always shudder at practice frameworks, because when imposed they are likely to be based on the wrong priorities - again another product of misplaced focus. But I think we need our own personal practice frameworks, hence the relevance to treatment times etc. Even if they come for 20 years, the slot will still be 30 minutes (if I still think that is right), and the aim will still be to move them from A (where they are on arrival) towards B (a better place by my understanding). That way, even if progress is slow, at least it doesn't leave the tracks and end up in orbit around the nearest chronic case.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2012 Created by Ronan O'Brien.
