EditorialChiropractic's Current State: Impacts for the Future
Section snippets
Professional Debates and Priorities
It is worthwhile for chiropractors to reflect on several business-as-usual approaches and their juxtaposition with what is happening in health care to remain as meaningful contributors to health care delivery and ideally enhance our ability to constructively engage in this delivery. The role that chiropractors play in the care of patients tomorrow will be a reflection of the changes we set in motion today.
The Institute for Alternative Futures recently published a report that summarized the
Primary Areas of Development
The moral of the story is that resting on one's laurels is a recipe for being eaten alive by the competition. I believe that chiropractic institutions and organizations need to develop a much greater sense of urgency in the following 3 areas:
- 1.
Evidence-based and best practices–oriented research priorities–We need to emphasize proactive applied research that helps figure out how to help patients get better quicker and at a lower cost as compared with what we do now and to develop effective
Conclusions
There is no magic legislation, no ultimate clinical trial, no absolute research study, and no perfect guideline that will endorse the status quo to turn back reimbursement to the good old days. Neither will the supreme enlightenment of the loyal opposition on the horizon permit us the luxury of procrastination or abdication of the hard work that is needed now.
References (12)
- et al.
Characteristics of chiropractic practitioners, patients, and encounters in Massachusetts and Arizona
J Manipulative Physiol Ther
(2005) - et al.
Complementary and alternative medicine use among adults: United States, 2002
Adv Data
(2004) - et al.
Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990-1997: results of a follow-up national survey
JAMA
(1998) - et al.
Trends in use of complementary and alternative medicine by US adults: 1997-2002
Altern Ther Health Med
(2005) - et al.
A systematic review of systematic reviews of spinal manipulation
J R Soc Med
(2006) - et al.
Review conclusions by Ernst and Canter regarding spinal manipulation refuted
Chiropr Osteopat
(2006)
Cited by (9)
Caught in the crosshairs: Identity and cultural authority within chiropractic
2011, Social Science and MedicineCitation Excerpt :I am using scope of practice here to refer to claims of the appropriate jurisdictional niche of the profession. Setting a narrow scope as neuromusculoskeletal spine experts or back/neck pain specialists has been advocated by several segments within the profession (Mootz, 2007; Murphy et al., 2008; Nelson et al., 2005; World Federation of Chiropractic (WFC), 2005). Others are vehemently opposed to this (Duenas, Carucci, Funk, & Gurney, 2003; Kent, 2009; Riggs, 2007; Rosner, 2005; Sportelli, 2006).
Diagnostic Imaging Practice Guidelines for Musculoskeletal Complaints in Adults-An Evidence-Based Approach-Part 3: Spinal Disorders
2008, Journal of Manipulative and Physiological TherapeuticsDiagnostic Imaging Guideline for Musculoskeletal Complaints in Adults-An Evidence-Based Approach-Part 2: Upper Extremity Disorders
2008, Journal of Manipulative and Physiological TherapeuticsDiagnostic Imaging Practice Guidelines for Musculoskeletal Complaints in Adults-An Evidence-Based Approach. Part 1: Lower Extremity Disorders
2007, Journal of Manipulative and Physiological TherapeuticsDiagnostic Imaging Practice Guidelines for Musculoskeletal Complaints in Adults-An Evidence-Based Approach: Introduction
2007, Journal of Manipulative and Physiological TherapeuticsA cross-sectional study of chiropractic students' research readiness using the Academic Self-Concept Analysis Scale
2017, Journal of Chiropractic Education