Physician's Perspective of Chiropractic Treatment - Essay Example

'Physician's Perspective of Chiropractic Treatment' is a worthy example of a paper on complementary and alternative therapies. 
There is a distinction between the services offered by the physician and the chiropractor and the physician may influence the availability of the chiropractor’s service.

The physician here is more likely to be an allopath.  This practitioner use drugs and surgery.  Such a practitioner is considered the gatekeeper of health services.  Over the years they have held out themselves to be the only legitimate practitioners of the healing arts.  In most cases, they are recognized as such by the law of the land.  Such an arrangement gives them the opportunity to refer to all other modes of healing as an alternative or in some cases complimentary. There is a need to investigate the Patient-reported skepticism towards conventional medicine and dissatisfaction with physicians.  It is believed that these two are the main factors in the increased use of chiropractor services. 

Hypothesis

There are three parts.  (1)  The effort needs to be made to further improve the relationship between general practitioners and chiropractors and, thus, establish chiropractic as a viable treatment option.  (2)  There was the feeling that most of the physicians were knowledgeable in chiropractic treatment.   (3) And that they were willing to make wider use of the chiropractor’s services. 

Research Design

The process has a suitable statistical basis.  The design is using data already collected.  This reduces some of the possibility of bias in the design.  This research arrangement is inadequate in answering (1) and (3) in the hypothesis.  There is limited validity in the answer to the element (2) of the hypothesis.

 The research sought the answer to the question as to if the physician thought he had the knowledge.  In some cases, some physicians may not have the knowledge.  They may say they do so as to not appear ignorant.  It would have been far more effective to seek out hard data.  This could be in the form of seeing actual certifications or course evidence.   The courses should have been taken at any level or point in their career.  In this case, a continuing professional education course would be valid.

The analysis shows the physician's willingness to refer to a limited area of service.  It did not ask what other areas would be suitable for referral.  It did not enquire as to what referrals it would accept from the chiropractor.  Such a referral would help establish a team effort between the two modes of healing.   This would show the recognition of the professional judgment of both practitioners. 

The wording here gives the impression that the physician is sending his patient to the chiropractor.  The thought process is similar to the physician sending the patient to the radiology department to have an x-ray performed.  In both cases, he sees it as his patient being released for a support service.

It should have asked what additional services could be performed by the chiropractor.  An effort should have been made to establish why the services are not used.  Also what they are willing to do to bring about the necessary change quickly.

Statistics Analysis

The chi-square distribution was used.  This is recognized as a valid technique when there is a test of a theoretical result to an actual result.  This is another valid tool.  It is used when there is the certainty of quantities tested.  This is valid.  The research started with the known number of physicians

Physicians

52% responded    
28% have knowledge  
43% for back/neck issues
70 to 90% believe the therapy is somewhat useful
90% see a demand for the service.

Patients

A 20% increase by 1993. 50% saw a physician

The schooling and regions of the physicians do not seem to add much to the analysis.  The patient data may be limited in quality.  It must be remembered that the patient may go to the chiropractor independent of the physician’s referral or opinion.

Conclusion

The analysis answers one part of the hypothesis. It is important to answer the other two areas of the hypothesis.  It would also be helpful to extend the analysis to all the provinces in Canada.  The wider the population studies the more accurate the results for analysis. Then there should be a complimentary analysis at the patient level.  This is the most important. The patient is the receiver of the service.  Most important the patient is paying for the service. In the interest of the patient, this comprehensive analysis is long overdue.

This means it would be important to consider the income effects on the physician who made the referral.