Advising people with back pain to take time off work: a survey examining the role of private musculoskeletal practitioners in the UK.

Research has demonstrated that health care practitioners' adherence to guidelines for managing low back pain (LBP) remain suboptimal in recommending work absence, but specific beliefs about their role in maintaining patients at work have not been adequately researched. We examined private musculoskeletal practitioners' (chiropractors, osteopaths, and physiotherapists) beliefs and reported clinical behaviours in reference to patients' work. A cross-sectional postal questionnaire of 900 musculoskeletal practitioners included the Attitudes to Back pain in musculoskeletal practitioners questionnaires, reported frequency of four work-related behaviours, and a new measure of practitioners' work-related beliefs. Data from 337 respondents (37%) were analysed. Eighty percent of respondents reported recommending work absence to patients with LBP sometimes, and 14% recommended a work absence often or always. Seventy percent of practitioners never visit the patient's workplace. Most practitioners report that they prescribe exercises that can be carried out at work. Physiotherapists visited the workplace more frequently and gave less sick leave certification than either of the other groups. They also regarded work as more beneficial and less of a threat to exacerbate patients' LBP. There were small but significant correlations between work-related beliefs and reported behaviours. Our study confirms that, in contrast to current guidelines, many practitioners believe that LBP necessitates work absence. Overall, practitioners perceived their role in returning patients to work as limited, and believed that direct contact with employers was beyond their remit. In the UK, physiotherapists appear to be better placed to liaise with work in terms of both their beliefs and activities.

Osteopathic approach to implementing and promoting interprofessional education.

Multidisciplinary fragmentation contributes to myriad medical errors and as many as 98,000 patient deaths per year. The Institute of Medicine has proposed steps to improve healthcare delivery, including providing more opportunities for interdisciplinary training. The authors describe the interprofessional education (IPE) program at Western University of Health Sciences (WesternU) in Pomona, California. In 2007, 9 colleges at WesternU-including the College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific-undertook an IPE initiative that resulted in creation of a 3-phase program. Part of the IPE development process involved identifying core competencies that were nontechnical and nonclinical and common to all healthcare professions. The IPE development and implementation process and the identified competencies were analyzed for their relationship to the tenets of osteopathic medicine and the core competencies of osteopathic medical education. Although these tenets and core competencies were not intentionally used in the development process of the WesternU IPE program, the analysis revealed that the major components of the program are congruent with the framework of osteopathic principles and practice. The osteopathic medical profession's founding principles, broad-based perspective, and health-promoting tenets put the profession in a position to emerge as one of the leading forces in IPE.

Toward an osteopathic psychiatry: the biocognitive model of mind.

Osteopathic medicine represents a valid tradition in Western medicine, but there are concerns about whether it is a viable tradition: will it end up a "poorer cousin" of the allopathic tradition or will it eventually simply be absorbed by the dominant model? This is particularly the case in psychiatry, where osteopathic medicine has never established a firm presence. Currently, the dominant ethos in psychiatry is reductive biologism, which tries to eliminate the notion of mind as a causative factor in behavior. The author's case is that this has failed to give rise to a human-centered psychiatry. His own model of mental disorder, the biocognitive model, is based on a molecular resolution of the mind-body problem (ie, the ancient question of how the immaterial mind and the material body interact). It is manifestly dualist (ie, it accords causative primacy to mind). This is firmly in the osteopathic medical tradition and is offered as a means of developing a distinctive model of psychiatry and hence a holistic general medicine.

Osteopathic graduate medical education 2010.

Osteopathic graduate medical education (OGME) continues to evolve. With the restructuring of the traditional osteopathic internship, which became effective July 1, 2008, for most specialties, the number of trainees in osteopathic residency programs has substantially grown. The authors detail the effects of the restructuring on OGME and provide an update on the current availability of OGME training opportunities. The present article does not, however, report data from the American Osteopathic Association Intern/Resident Registration Program (ie, the AOA "Match").

The effectiveness of a posted information package on the beliefs and behavior of musculoskeletal practitioners: the UK Chiropractors, Osteopaths, and Musculoskeletal Physiotherapists Low Back Pain ManagemENT (COMPLeMENT) randomized trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of a printed information package on the low back pain (LBP)-related beliefs and reported behavior of musculoskeletal practitioners (chiropractors, osteopaths, and musculoskeletal physiotherapists) across the United Kingdom. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: A substantial proportion of musculoskeletal practitioners in United Kingdom does not follow current LBP guideline recommendations. METHODS: In total, 1758 practitioners were randomly allocated to either of the 2 study arms. One arm was posted a printed information package containing guideline recommendations for the management of LBP (n = 876) and the other received no intervention (n = 882). The primary outcome measure consisted of 3 "quality indicators" (activity, work, and bed-rest) relating to a vignette of a patient with LBP, in which responses were dichotomized into either "guideline-inconsistent" or "guideline-consistent." The secondary outcome was the practitioners' LBP-related beliefs, measured using the Health Care Providers Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale. Outcomes were measured at baseline and at 6 months. RESULTS: Follow-up at 6 months was 89%. The changes in reported behavior on the quality indicators were as follows: activity, odds ratio (OR) 1.29 (95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.61) and number needed to be treated (NNT), 19 (15-28); work, OR 1.35 (1.07-1.70) and NNT 19 (14-29); and bed-rest, OR 1.31 (0.97-1.76) and NNT 47 (33-103). The composite NNT for a change from guideline-inconsistent to guideline-consistent behavior on at least 1 of the 3 quality indicators was 10 (9-14). LBP-related beliefs were significantly improved in those who were sent the information package (P = 0.002), but only to a small degree (mean difference, 0.884 scale points; 95% confidence interval, 0.319-1.448). CONCLUSION: Printed educational material can shift LBP-related beliefs and reported behaviors of musculoskeletal practitioners, toward practice that is more in line with guideline recommendations.

Billing and coding for osteopathic manipulative treatment.

Some osteopathic physicians are not properly reimbursed by insurance companies after providing osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) to their patients. Common problems associated with lack of reimbursements include insurers bundling OMT with the standard evaluation and management service and confusing OMT with chiropractic manipulative treatment or physical therapy services. The authors suggest methods of appeal for denied reimbursement claims that will also prevent future payment denials.

The DO difference: an analysis of causal relationships affecting the degree-change debate.

CONTEXT: The academic credential awarded to osteopathic physicians is the doctor of osteopathy or doctor of osteopathic medicine (DO) degree. Public recognition of the degree has been disappointingly low, however, leading some members of the profession to argue for a change in the degree's name and formal designation. OBJECTIVES: To investigate antecedents to the desire among osteopathic medical students to change vs retain the DO degree designation and maintain "the DO difference." METHODS: A self-administered cross-sectional 38-item electronic survey was distributed to 480 students at an osteopathic medical school in the Midwestern United States. The instrument included knowledge-based items about osteopathic principles and practice (OPP) as well as items designed to assess attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and intention to support a proposed degree change. RESULTS: An overall response rate of 45% was achieved (n=214). Structural equation modeling revealed that low levels of OPP knowledge were associated with positive attitudes and subjective norms favoring a degree change with the reverse true for opposing students. Knowledge did not influence perceived behavioral control. Attitudes were the best predictor of intention to vote with 85% variance predicted in our models; perceived behavioral control was the best predictor of intention to debate with approximately 38% variance observed. CONCLUSIONS: As a result of diminished use of palpation and osteopathic manipulative treatment--two historic markers of professional identity among osteopathic physicians--the DO degree designation as an indicator of difference has received increasing scrutiny. Improved student awareness of OPP is essential to maintaining the DO difference in clinical practice and with regard to the DO degree designation.