Author:
Richard H. Adler
There appears to be a conspicuous attitude change between chiropractic
and medical practitioners. The words of Leon Wiltse, M.D., delivered in
his 1985 presidential address to the North American Spine Society, may
best express the changing attitude of medical doctors:
Perhaps we can take a lesson from this in dealing with
spinal manipulation. The explanation given as to how the manipulation
works may be quite wrong by our lights, but its practitioners must be
doing something right, or 10 million people a year would not be filling
their offices. We need to at least learn about it.
Chiropractors and medical doctors have improved their interdisciplinary
communication in recent years, fueled, in part, by published research
findings validating the effectiveness of spinal manipulation. For
example, an oft-cited text on cervical injury written by chiropractors
has been well received by medical doctors. See Foreman S.M., Croft
A.C., "Whiplash Injuries - The Cervical Acceleration/Deceleration
Syndrome," Baltimore, Williams & Wilkins, 1988. Moreover, Paul
Goodley, M.D., of the American College of Orthopedic Medicine stated in
his letter to the editor of the Journal of American Medical Association
(September 1988):
Manipulation does have scientific support but, because it is
primarily an art in its delivery, as is surgery, we encounter problems
in establishing unambiguous statistical evidence. Recent medical text
(reference to Kirkaldy-Willis: Managing Low Back Pain,
2d ed., 1988) supports the efficacy of manipulation as a rational
approach to certain conditions, and a long universal medical tradition
supports it (citing Manipulation Past and Present, 1975, by renowned orthopedist James Cyriax, M.D.).
Additionally, independent and respected health science journals have
begun publishing chiropractic research with more frequency. In recent
years, journals published and/or endorsed by medical associations have
dropped their anti-chiropractic editorial bias. In 1992, for example,
the American College of Physicians, in its
Annals of Internal Medicine,
published medical research regarding chiropractic manipulation for back
pain. Medical doctors were asked to reappraise the roles of spinal
manipulation and the chiropractic profession because of "recent
research favorable to the chiropractic treatment of patients with low
back pain."
1 The Journal of Family Practice of the
American Academy of Family Physicians published an article by Peter
Curtis, M.D., and Jeffrey Bove, D.C., from the University of North
Carolina at Chapel Hill. The authors encouraged family physicians to
"re-evaluate their relationship with chiropractors" and provided
guidelines for referral.
2
Other medical doctors have written editorials in medical journals
agreeing that there is a "pressing need for family physicians to
re-evaluate chiropractic in light of both the increasing role it plays
in the treatment of musculoskeletal ailments and the epidemic
proportion of low back pain sufferers."
3
Daniel Cherkin, Ph.D., of Seattle has published research in the United States
4
showing that, with respect to back pain, there is a higher satisfaction
level expressed by patients of chiropractors than those of medical
doctors. Dr. Cherkin comments on his recent study of family physicians
in the state of Washington showing "surprisingly little antipathy
towards chiropractors." Thus:
- Only 3% dismissed chiropractors as incompatible with medical doctors.
- A clear majority had encouraged patients to see a chiropractor and indicated a desire to learn more about what chiropractors do.
- 25% viewed chiropractors as "an excellent source of care for musculoskeletal problems." 5
Dr. Cherkin urged more widespread cooperation in the interest of patients, medical doctors, and chiropractors.
The bridge-building between chiropractic and medical practitioners can be seen at the institutional level as well.
AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS- "There are no ethical or collective restraints to full
professional cooperation between doctors of chiropractic and medical
physicians."
- Such cooperation should include "referrals, group practice,
participation in all health care delivery systems, treatment and
services in and through hospitals, participation in student exchange
programs between chiropractic and medical colleges, and cooperation in
research and continuing education programs."
AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY- "There are and should be no ethical or collective
impediments to interprofessional association and cooperation between
doctors of chiropractic and medical radiologists in any setting where
such association may occur, such as in a hospital, private practice,
research, education, care of a patient, or other legal arrangement."
- "Radiologists are urged to be sensitive to and consider the legitimate radiologic needs of...doctors of chiropractic."
AMERICAN HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION (AHA)- The AHA "has no objection to a hospital granting
privileges to doctors of chiropractic for the purposes of administering
chiropractic treatment, furthering the clinical education and training
of doctors of chiropractic, or having x-rays, clinical laboratory tests
and reports thereon made for doctors of chiropractic and their patients
and/or previously taken x-rays, clinical laboratory tests and reports
made available to them upon (patient) authorization."
Medical doctors are clearly becoming more interested in what
chiropractors do. At the same time, many chiropractors have developed
informal alliances with different medical practitioners, receiving
referrals from medical doctors and, in turn, referring their patients
to medical practitioners for consultation/treatment when the need
arises. Practitioners interested in developing better interprofessional
relationships may consider the following suggestions:
- Meet with a local chiropractor or medical practitioner and make arrangements to observe his/her practice for an hour or two.
- Talk with one of your colleagues who has developed a good medical-chiropractic interprofessional working relationship.
- When making a patient referral, remember that the goal is to
achieve effective interaction by communicating successfully across
professional or specialist boundaries; clarity and brevity are
important.
- When making a patient referral, explain to the patient the
reason for the referral, the expected benefits, and that the findings
of the second opinion doctor will be reviewed by the treating doctor
and patient.
- When referring a patient to a chiropractic consultant or medical doctor known only through his/her reputation, be sure to call
the practitioner personally to ensure that the referral will be welcome
and appropriate. Once the call is made by the referring practitioner,
the patient can subsequently telephone to schedule the appointment.
- The referring practitioner should send a brief letter
describing in mutually-understood language the reason for the referral,
including any pertinent records and diagnostic studies.
- It is always important to clearly state whether the referral
is for diagnostic purposes, analysis of reasonable and necessary care,
or whether it is for treatment to supplement or replace care the
referring practitioner has been providing.
- The referring doctor will anticipate a report from the
consulting doctor on the results of the examination. It is a good idea
to satisfy this aspect of interprofessional protocol.
We hope this information proves useful to you.
Very truly yours,
ADLER GIERSCH, P.S.
Richard H. Adler
Attorney at Law
1 Shekelle G. Adams, AH, et al., "Spinal Manipulation for
Low Back Pain," Annals of Internal Medicine Int Med, 1992, 117(7), pp.
590-598.
2 Curtis P., Bove J., "Family Physicians, Chiropractors and Back Pain," Journal of Family Practice, 1992, 35(5), pp. 551-555.
3 Reis R., Borkan J., Hermoni D., "Low Back Pain: More Than Anatomy," Journal of Family Practice 1992, 35(5) pp. 509-510.
4 Cherkin D.C., Deyo R.A., et al., "Evaluation of a
Physician Education Intervention to Improve Primary Care for Low-Back
Pain I: Impact on Physicians," Spine 1991 16(10) pp. 1168-1178.
5 Cherkin D., "Family Physicians and Chiropractors: What's
Best for the Patient?," Journal of Family Practice, 1992, 35(5) pp.
505-506.