I had an interesting discussion a while back about the number of therapy types and therapist titles there are, and how confusing it can be.
Sports Therapists, Sports Massage Therapists, Physiotherapists, Osteopaths, Chiropractors, Sports Rehabilitators etc etc.
I choose to never comment on a therapist or title, but I do think commenting on therapies is fair game (assuming that every practitioner is staying within their remit).
Taking the ball, not the man, as it were (though I never made a tackle in my life)
I tend to break therapies down in to;
– things that help you *feel* better
– things that help you *get* better
… wherein *feeling* better is often quick, but transient, and *getting* better is slower, but longer-term (often permanent).
Many therapists tend to favor one or the other, knowingly or unknowingly.
And my opinion is, *if we explain what we are trying to achieve*, neither is right or wrong.
And so that doesn’t mean that I don’t utilise symptom modifiers. But I always explain that this is what they are; things that will help you feel a bit better, for a bit. Think massage, manipulations (crack!), cupping, needling. All fine, all very well received by people in pain, but all costly when chasing a magic bullet weekly/monthly.
And, rather facetiously, I tend to tell people that there are loads of ways to spend £60 to *feel* better for a bit. So I’m told…
So my focus is nearly always the second option when people are with me in the clinic. And they are not actually therapies, as such.
The things that more often than not help people *get* better are a better understanding, help with load management, education and fear-reduction, self-management advice … and probably getting a little stronger/becoming more robust.
As I say, both approaches, when communicated well and not mis-sold with big words and wild promises, have their place.
And actually it reminded me of another discussion I had once, about music genres, and being asked what type of music I listen to, and I said then – and I stand by it still – I don’t think of genres; to me it’s just good or bad*
And that works for therapists/therapies too. Rather than getting hung up on the therapist title, go by reputation from friends, family, colleagues, Google reviews, and aim for “good”.
All therapists work a little differently, and – to reiterate -there is not necessarily a right or wrong approach; more a case of the right person for the right condition at the right time.
However, if I were seeking treatment, these are the things which would be non-negotiable to me:
- An approach based around my goals and aims. I ask everyone what their hope is from the treatment (and VERY few answer “to take the pain away”)
- Everyone should be screened for ‘Yellow Flags’, including all round well-being
- Not rushing through the screening to just get “hands-on” asap.
- The length of treatment is case by case but should be an ongoing discussion, even if it is not possible to be a joint decision (and I think it actually should be closer to the latter than it often is). A therapist having their diary open before you are off the couch is not the way.
- And whilst some conditions have no obvious end point, we should always be trying to educate and empower to make ourselves gradually more redundant, rather than blindly rebooking and building complete reliance on (often) transient treatments.
I’d be interested to hear yours 🙂
*(Who am I kidding, I just listen to Bob Dylan all day, but that wouldn’t work).