In regards to treatment, regardless of what expertise and research has to say, if the patient isn't on board we are wasting our time. Patient's seek us for help, we do not seek them for our need to treat or put food on our table (though that is debatable to some I'm sure). We (physical therapy) are ancillary service and on rare occasions will our expertise impact a life or death scenario (different when talking about evaluation/screening). But a close second in this poll, to me, is best available evidence, then clinical expertise. Rationale: If there is "best available research" (which I am categorizing as RCT, Systematic reviews, Meta-analysis, ie. Higher levels of evidence), what will hold up in court to a judge (with minimal medical background)?
What if there isn't high level of research on a topic of treatment? Good question, but it seems that probably shouldn't be the staple to your treatment approach.
Just my opinion being a relatively newer grad, if you couldn't tell anyways :)
In regards to treatment, regardless of what expertise and research has to say, if the patient isn't on board we are wasting our time. Patient's seek us for help, we do not seek them for our need to treat or put food on our table (though that is debatable to some I'm sure). We (physical therapy) are ancillary service and on rare occasions will our expertise impact a life or death scenario (different when talking about evaluation/screening). But a close second in this poll, to me, is best available evidence, then clinical expertise. Rationale: If there is "best available research" (which I am categorizing as RCT, Systematic reviews, Meta-analysis, ie. Higher levels of evidence), what will hold up in court to a judge (with minimal medical background)?
What if there isn't high level of research on a topic of treatment? Good question, but it seems that probably shouldn't be the staple to your treatment approach.
Just my opinion being a relatively newer grad, if you couldn't tell anyways :)