Figg-Latham Joanna, Rajendran Dévan
Research Department, European School of Osteopathy, Boxley House, Boxley, Maidstone, Kent, ME14 3DZ, UK.
Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2017 Feb;27:97-105. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2016.10.006. Epub 2016 Oct 18.
Clinical guidelines are derived from best research evidence and aim to: improve quality of non-specific low back pain (nsLBP) management and identify patients at risk of suffering chronic pain. However, guideline discordant attitudes and beliefs have been identified in healthcare students and practitioners, including osteopaths.
A qualitative approach with elements of grounded theory was used to explore underlying attitudes and beliefs of practitioners/students working in a British osteopathic education institution. All participants rejected guideline recommendations for managing nsLBP. A constant comparative method was used to code and analyse emergent themes from transcript data.
Purposive sampling identified 5 clinic tutors and 7 students; all participated in semi-structured interviews.
Our central theme was a 'Precedence of Osteopathy' over medicine and other manual therapies. Three subthemes were: 1) beliefs about self; 2) perceptions of others; 3) attitudes to guidelines and research.
Participants possess a strong professional identity fostered by their education. This bestows autonomy, authority and distinctness upon them. The central theme was modelled as a lens through which participants viewed research: the evidence pyramid appears inverted, explaining why participants value expert opinion above all other evidence. Guidelines and research are perceived to threaten professional identity. In contractual situations that oblige practitioners to follow guidelines management, perhaps reflecting a pragmatic response to health-care market forces, clinical practice is modified. Developing further understanding of osteopaths' attitudes and beliefs and behaviour in respect of evidence-based guidance in education is important to enhance the quality of clinical practice in osteopathy.
临床指南源自最佳研究证据,旨在:提高非特异性下腰痛(nsLBP)的管理质量,并识别有患慢性疼痛风险的患者。然而,已在医学生和从业者(包括整骨疗法医生)中发现了与指南不一致的态度和信念。
采用一种带有扎根理论元素的定性方法,以探究在英国一所整骨疗法教育机构工作的从业者/学生的潜在态度和信念。所有参与者都拒绝了关于管理nsLBP的指南建议。采用持续比较法对转录数据中出现的主题进行编码和分析。
目的抽样确定了5名临床导师和7名学生;所有人都参与了半结构化访谈。
我们的核心主题是整骨疗法相对于医学和其他手法治疗的“优先地位”。三个子主题分别是:1)对自我的信念;2)对他人的看法;3)对指南和研究的态度。
参与者通过他们的教育形成了强烈的职业认同感。这赋予了他们自主性、权威性和独特性。核心主题被建模为参与者看待研究的一个视角:证据金字塔似乎是倒置的,这解释了为什么参与者最看重专家意见而非其他所有证据。指南和研究被认为会威胁到职业认同感。在要求从业者遵循指南管理的合同情况下,或许反映了对医疗保健市场力量的务实回应,临床实践会有所改变。进一步了解整骨疗法医生在教育中对循证指导的态度、信念和行为,对于提高整骨疗法的临床实践质量很重要。