Sunday, May 07, 2006

Manipulation of the Spine: using Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment

http://www.drlglass.com/index.htm
Take from:
The Best of Both Worlds
Dr. Lawrence S. Glass is an osteopathic physician, or D.O. -- a doctor who combines the scientific training of an M.D. with the chiropractic skills of spinal manipulation.

D.O.'s and M.D.'s practice the same medical specialties. However, D.O.'s are distinguished by their expertise in musculo-skeletal medicine. D.O.'s focus on the role of the body's structure and function in disease and wellness.

As in integrative medicine, osteopathy emphasizes the body's ability to heal itself.

Dr. Glass' philosophy is based on a patient-centered approach to treating the the total person with conventional medicine, spinal manipulation, and proven complementary therapies, including prolotherapy.



DO's, or Doctors of Osteopathy, use diagnostic and treatment methods of allopathic medicine, but they also practice Manipulation of the Spine. Spinal manipulation is designed to affect the structure or function of the patient's spine by applying contact, force or leverage to the articular joints.

The theory behind osteopathic Manipulation of the Spine is based on the close association between the spinal vertebrae and the autonomic nervous system. The neuromuscular system connects the spinal vertebrae and the autonomic nervous system via the sympathetic trunk and ganglia. The goal of osteopathic spinal manipulation is to maintain balance by affecting the musculo-skeletal system. According to the philosophy of Osteopathy, once this balance or homeostasis has been achieved, the body can heal itself.

Osteopathic spinal manipulation is a generalized therapy that increases circulation at the site of an injury or problem area. However, osteopaths view structure and function of the body as inseparable. Therefore, treating one site can have favorable effects on other parts of the body.

By contrast, chiropractic adjustments are more specific than general. Chiropractors usually work only on the spine while osteopaths work on all joints and soft tissues as well as the spine. Osteopathic spinal manipulation includes stretching techniques and manipulative thrusts to spinal joints. More than 100 distinct therapeutic procedures are used in osteopathic manipulation of the spine.

Osteopathic physicians such as Dr. Glass may use both classic osteopathic manipulation and chiropractic techniques. The advantage of osteopathic spinal manipulation is that it can be used to treat a wide array of conditions that may not respond to chiropractic manipulation. In addition, osteopaths integrate manipulation of the spine with other therapies -- allopathic and complementary therapies -- in designing the optimum treatment plan for each patient.

1 Comments:

At 4:52 AM, backcare said...

Hi.very good site.so what do your think about the following things:

Seven “ facts “about acupuncture .

Myth: Acupuncture is widely used in China

Truth: Acupuncture is not widely used in China

Acupuncture is not widely used in China as a part of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) - TCM also being a phrase that originated in the 20th century (1954). Acupuncture declined in popularity once scientific medicine was introduced to China.” In 1995 the Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP) went to China and found that around 15-20% of the population used TCM (not just acupuncture), and that those people used TCM in conjunction with scientific medicine: what we would term complementary medicine. This level of use is at the lower end of the scale compared to other countries with advanced healthcare systems and it falls well short of countries such as Germany, Canada, France and Australia where the use of alternative remedies is more than twice that of China. China's use of alternative remedies is actually lower than the UK population's - currently around 25%.

Myth:Acupuncture can stimulate the body’s own healing response and help restore its natural balance by “Qi”

Truth: There is no evidence for the existence of this universal energy(“Qi”)

There are no scientific instruments that can detect it. It seemingly can only be detected and adjusted by practitioners. It is not a falsifiable hypothesis (it can't be tested) and as such is meaningless.

Myth: Acupuncture is an ancient Chinese cure that has existed, unchanging, for centuries.

Truth: acupuncture was formalized in a complex way over the past 100 years, mostly in Europe and France and after the Communist takeover in China. Before that time there was no consistent formalization of acupuncture points or what each place was supposed to do. It was largely regional, and the thinking varied from city to city."

Myth:Acupuncture offers specific cures

Truth: Acupuncture doesn’t offer specific cure .

If it has the effect of, say, releasing endorphins through the application of needles, well, many things release endorphins -- a walk in the woods, a 5-mile run, a pinch on the butt."

Myth: Acupuncture can claim to have an effect many condition.

Truth: Acupuncture can only claim have an effect very few condition.

If there is one area that acupuncture can claim to have an effect it's in pain relief. Although most evidence supporting acupuncture can be dismissed as anecdotal, trials have been done where acupuncture does show a pain relieving effect above placebo. The effect is not large, of the same magnitude as taking Aspirin or Ibuprofen, but nonetheless it's there and cannot be ignored.That's not to say that there are not problems with such claims however. Pain is an entirely subjective experience; it cannot be directly measured and the severity felt depends to a large extent on the patient's state of mind; which can be influenced by the practitioner giving the treatment. This leads on to the problem of blinding procedures with acupuncture. The practitioner is always aware of whether he's giving real or sham acupuncture and which patients he's giving them to.The pain relief effect does seem to exist; however, it's not clear whether it's a real effect of acupuncture or a strong placebo effect that's induced in the patient by the elaborate procedure of an acupuncture treatment

Myth: Acupuncture is very safe:

Truth: Acupuncture is not inherently dangerous but being an invasive technique, it is not risk free.

Haematoma may result from the accidental puncture of a circulatory structure. Nerve injury can result from the accidental puncture of any nerve. Brain damage or stroke is possible with very deep needling at the base of skull. Also rare, but possible, is pneumothorax from deep needling into the lung, and kidney damage from deep needling in the lower back. Needles that are not properly sterilized can transfer diseases such as HIV and hepatitis. There is also the danger, common to all alternative therapies, of not seeking proper medical treatment because of an over reliance on alternatives. Acupuncturists are not doctors and will not have the capability of diagnosing a serious illness from its typical symptoms.

Myth: Acupuncture is more effective.

Truth: Acupuncture is not very effective.

The practise is based on untenable principles and the small amount of evidence there is to support its use in pain relief can also be called into question. Although there are claims that it has a mild pain relieving effect, it probably does so simply because it's an elaborate placebo. Whether the mild pain relieving properties are of acupuncture are real or not, most claims for the efficacy of acupuncture are grossly over-exaggerated. If there is a use for Acupuncture, it can only be in mild pain relief. The question then becomes a matter of whether the cost of acupuncture for this mild pain relief can be justified

(Content from internet,www.skeptics.org.uk ,etc)

Bristol Chinese Pain relief Acupuncture

www.backachetherapy.co.uk

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google
WWW This blog