we cannot do everything — and should not try

1
Physiotherapy December 1999/vol 85/no 12 694 I READ with interest Joyce Williams comments in November upon our conclusion (Hope and Forshaw, 1999) that ‘physical therapy alone is unlikely to be an effective treatment’ in back pain patients presenting with high levels of psychological distress. She suggests that a ‘school for bravery ‘approach would be the solution in the majority of these individuals. I agree that an approach which includes behavioural modification, which the ‘school for bravery’ as described does, is likely to be the most effective form of management for the patient group identified in our paper. What I hoped that the paper would do is highlight the fact that these patients cannot be physically manipulated back into health and that the traditional skills of physiotherapists need to be supplemented by an awareness of the psychological dimension of a patient’s presentation, and in this I again concur with Mrs Williams. However, I also believe that our area of expertise can be stretched only so far. It has been stated that current education in physiotherapy does not equip physiotherapists with the skills to conduct a good psychosocial assessment (Watson, 1999) and if this is the case then it could be assumed that the ability to manage such problems is also lacking in physiotherapists generally. The involvement of professionals such as psychologists is, I therefore believe, preferable in the production and implementation of rehabilitation programmes to optimise the effect of such programmes. In this I disagree with Mrs Williams. She states in her 1989 paper that the involvement of psychologists was unnecessary and unhelpful in her ‘school for bravery’ approach. In the physiotherapy department in which I work we select patients into a rehabilitation programme on the basis of a physical and psychosocial assessment. The programme is run jointly with a clinical psychologist and unlike Mrs Williams’ experience patients have commented on the positive benefits of psychologists’ interventions as have the physiotherapists. Certainly, having watched the psychologists at work, I have come to appreciate their skill and the help they can offer. As physiotherapists we can develop superb skills of physical assessment, and these plus an awareness of the psychosocial aspects of the disease process can enable us to select the optimum treatment approach for any one patient. We also have an integral part to play in the rehabilitation of patients across a wide spectrum of presentations. However, we have to be careful in thinking that we can manage every situation on our own. It has to be recognised that a physiotherapist is not and should not be a ‘Jack of all trades’, and that in a varied number of situations help from other quarters is necessary to produce optimum treatment effect. In conclusion, therefore, a treatment approach which involves a behavioural element is to be recommended for patients who have a psychosocial element which is involved in sustaining their problem, but it may be the province of more than just the physiotherapist to be involved in their management. Whether or not the ‘school for bravery’ would be a more effective approach to the management of this patient group as compared to the many multidisciplinary rehabilitation programmes that exist around the world is open to debate. Philip Hope MSc MCSP Chesterfield References Hope, P and Forshaw, M (1999). ‘Assessment of psychological distress is important in patients presenting with low back pain’, Physiotherapy, 85, 10, 563-570. Watson, P (1999). ‘Psychosocial assessment – The emergence of a new fashion, or a new tool in physiotherapy for musculoskeletal pain?’ Physiotherapy, 85, 10, 530-535. Williams, J (1989). ‘Illness behaviour and wellness behaviour’, Physiotherapy, 75, 1, 2-7. We Cannot Do Everything – and Should Not Try Binding CSP Periodicals A complete year’s issues for 1999 of both Physiotherapy and Physiotherapy Frontline can be bound in cloth covers with the title, volume number and badge blocked in black on the spine and front cover. The price for 12 issues of Physiotherapyy will be £20 (inclusive of return UK postage, packing and insurance). Back numbers can be bound in the same way for £23, or without badge or lettering for £18. The price for the 23 issues of Frontline will be £23. Please send a complete set of issues with cheque payable to ‘J R Harris’, or a postal order for the full amount, to J R Harris, Bookbinder, 191 Sandpit Lane, St Albans, Herts AL4 OBT, (tel 01717 846606). Please ensure they arrive by March 31, 2000. Please write your name and address, in pencil, on the title page of each issue, and please pack parcels carefully as we received several parcels last year broken open and re-packed in GPO plastic bags, some with issues missing. It is regretted that Mr Harris cannot supply missing issues. Orders cannot be accepted unless they are pre- paid. If you do not receive your bound copies by the end of April, please contact J R Harris immediately.

Upload: philip-hope

Post on 15-Sep-2016

213 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: We Cannot Do Everything — and Should Not Try

Physiotherapy December 1999/vol 85/no 12

694

I READ with interest Joyce Williamscomments in November upon ourconclusion (Hope and Forshaw, 1999)that ‘physical therapy alone is unlikely tobe an effective treatment’ in back painpatients presenting with high levels ofpsychological distress. She suggests that a‘school for bravery ‘approach would bethe solution in the majority of theseindividuals. I agree that an approachwhich includes behavioural modification,which the ‘school for bravery’ as describeddoes, is likely to be the most effective formof management for the patient groupidentified in our paper.

What I hoped that the paper would dois highlight the fact that these patientscannot be physically manipulated backinto health and that the traditional skillsof physiotherapists need to besupplemented by an awareness of thepsychological dimension of a patient’spresentation, and in this I again concurwith Mrs Williams.

However, I also believe that our area ofexpertise can be stretched only so far. It has been stated that current educationin physiotherapy does not equipphysiotherapists with the skills to conducta good psychosocial assessment (Watson,1999) and if this is the case then it couldbe assumed that the ability to managesuch problems is also lacking inphysiotherapists generally. Theinvolvement of professionals such aspsychologists is, I therefore believe,

preferable in the production andimplementation of rehabilitationprogrammes to optimise the effect of such programmes.

In this I disagree with Mrs Williams.She states in her 1989 paper that theinvolvement of psychologists wasunnecessary and unhelpful in her ‘schoolfor bravery’ approach.

In the physiotherapy department inwhich I work we select patients into arehabilitation programme on the basis ofa physical and psychosocial assessment.The programme is run jointly with a clinical psychologist and unlike Mrs Williams’ experience patients havecommented on the positive benefits ofpsychologists’ interventions as have thephysiotherapists.

Certainly, having watched thepsychologists at work, I have come toappreciate their skill and the help theycan offer.

As physiotherapists we can developsuperb skills of physical assessment, andthese plus an awareness of thepsychosocial aspects of the disease processcan enable us to select the optimumtreatment approach for any one patient.We also have an integral part to play inthe rehabilitation of patients across a widespectrum of presentations.

However, we have to be careful inthinking that we can manage everysituation on our own. It has to berecognised that a physiotherapist is not

and should not be a ‘Jack of all trades’,and that in a varied number of situationshelp from other quarters is necessary toproduce optimum treatment effect.

In conclusion, therefore, a treatmentapproach which involves a behaviouralelement is to be recommended forpatients who have a psychosocial elementwhich is involved in sustaining theirproblem, but it may be the province ofmore than just the physiotherapist to beinvolved in their management. Whetheror not the ‘school for bravery’ would be a more effective approach to themanagement of this patient group ascompared to the many multidisciplinaryrehabilitation programmes that existaround the world is open to debate.

Philip Hope MSc MCSPChesterfield

ReferencesHope, P and Forshaw, M (1999).‘Assessment of psychological distress isimportant in patients presenting with lowback pain’, Physiotherapy, 85, 10, 563-570.

Watson, P (1999). ‘Psychosocialassessment – The emergence of a newfashion, or a new tool in physiotherapy formusculoskeletal pain?’ Physiotherapy, 85,10, 530-535.

Williams, J (1989). ‘Illness behaviour andwellness behaviour’, Physiotherapy, 75, 1,2-7.

We Cannot Do Everything – and Should Not Try

Binding CSP Periodicals

A complete year’s issues for 1999 of both Physiotherapy and Physiotherapy Frontline can be bound in clothcovers with the title, volume number and badge blocked in black on the spine and front cover.

The price for 12 issues of Physiotherapyy will be £20 (inclusive of return UK postage, packing andinsurance). Back numbers can be bound in the same way for £23, or without badge or lettering for £18.

The price for the 23 issues of Frontline will be £23.

Please send a complete set of issues with cheque payable to ‘J R Harris’, or a postal order for the fullamount, to J R Harris, Bookbinder, 191 Sandpit Lane, St Albans, Herts AL4 OBT, (tel 01717 846606).

Please ensure they arrive by March 31, 2000. Please write your name and address, in pencil, on the titlepage of each issue, and please pack parcels carefully as we received several parcels last year broken openand re-packed in GPO plastic bags, some with issues missing.

It is regretted that Mr Harris cannot supply missing issues. Orders cannot be accepted unless they are pre-paid. If you do not receive your bound copies by the end of April, please contact J R Harris immediately.