Alternative and Complementary Medicine and Nursing in the Acute Rehab Unit
Complementary and Alternative methods of treating and diagnosing disease have existed for a long time. However, it is only in the last few decades that efforts to evaluate the effectiveness of these methods by clinical research and their ultimate integration in patient care have been shown (Wainapel et al., 2015). Manipulative therapies are among the complementary and alternative modalities whose usefulness is continually being evaluated in various areas of medicine. Osteopathic manipulative therapy is probably the most obvious of these modalities. This paper evaluates the position and the role of osteopathic manipulative therapy (OMT) in current rehabilitation procedures, especially in the acute rehab unit.
OMT is a rather recent modality in complementary and alternative medicine; its philosophy and principles were formulated in the nineteenth century by Dr. Andrew Taylor (Wainapel et al., 2015). The modality is meant to manipulate soft tissues, vertebrae, and joints as a primary way of diagnosing and treating disease. The whole practice of osteopathy is based on the understanding that the human body’s functions are interrelated and self-regulated and that the body can defend itself against noxious stimuli or adapt to them; failure of the protective or adaptive mechanisms is what causes disease (Prinsen, Hensel, & Snow, 2014).
In rehabilitative medicine, osteopathy has been shown to be effective in restoration of physical or mechanical function in many parts of the body (Wainapel et al., 2015). The practice has been used most notably in the management of fibromyalgia and spine disorders. Although majorly used in this areas for relief of pain, it is thought to have an important effect on the long-term muscle function of the affected body areas (Wainapel et al., 2015). Moreover, relief of pain in of great importance in the acute rehab unit hence the usefulness of osteopathy there. In the long-term, past studies have shown that OMT can reduce the psychological symptoms associated with some chronic diseases.
Despite its usefulness, OMT and the other modalities of complementary and alternative medicine present intricate controversies which tend to constrain their usefulness in current medical practice (Prinsen, Hensel, & Snow, 2014). The American Osteopathic Association, for instance, has been accused of exaggerating the real value of manipulative therapy. According to Wainapel et al. (2015), it has been thought that the emphasis and by extension the funds that the association is putting into the training and advocacy of osteopathy is misplaced. This in itself presents and ethical dilemma: It is obviously unethical to lie to people the real value of a practice while one has full knowledge that the said practice will not help the patients to full recovery.
Cranial therapy presents another key ethical and probably legal controversy. The risks posed by cranial therapy to the life and functionality of the individual overtly outweigh the likely benefits of the practice (Ferguson, 2003). This means that the practice is obviously not ethically considering the very purpose of the practice of medicine. Moreover, cranial therapy and its likely complications are an important legal subject. As such, cranial therapy is something that should be considered criminal and should have been denounced by the osteopathic association.
Personally, I do not support the continued use of osteopathy in the acute rehabilitation unit. The practice of osteopathy is overrated and is not as beneficial to the patients as it is made to sound. Even though it does help in reducing pain in some cases, it is not as effective in that regard as conventional analgesics would be. Using ethical principles as an ethical approach to nursing, it is obvious that the benefits of osteopathy to the patient are much lesser that the cost incurred by the patient and the risk posed by some of the procedures. In fact, the whole practice can be thought of as a form of maleficence and profit-seeking by the practitioners.
References
Ferguson, A. (2003). A review of the physiology of cranial osteopathy. Journal of Osteopathic Medicine, 6(2), 74-84. http://faculty.une.edu/com/jnorton/PDFfilesCranial/CranialPhysiology.pdf
Prinsen, J. K., Hensel, K. L., & Snow, R. J. (2014). OMT associated with reduced analgesic prescribing and fewer missed work days in patients with low back pain: an observational study. The Journal of the American Osteopathic Association, 114(2), 90-98. http://jaoa.org/article.aspx?articleid=2094629
Wainapel, S. F., Rand, S., Fishman, L. M., & Halstead-Kenny, J. (2015). Integrating complementary/alternative medicine into primary care: Evaluating the evidence and appropriate implementation. International journal of general medicine, 8, 361-372. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4676622/
