In walks your 2pm evaluation. Well, not really…they scoot in backwards, sitting on their four-wheeled walker complaining about how long the medical history form is and “why do you need to know all that stuff?” A long past medical history is fine, you can handle that, you can synthesize how 10 years of uncontrolled diabetes mixes with COPD, a back problem they’ve had “since they were 19” and the multiple progressive knee scopes and procedures they’ve had.
During the interaction, however, the person is “off.” They don’t interact with the ease and simplicity that you do with your staff, your friends or the prior patient. You can’t quite describe it well. Continue reading
Dost thou follow me on Twitter?
Marketing is not mysterious. Let me simplify.
Be Yourself. In Public. Continue reading
There is a clash between knowing that biomechanics and structure are not 100% responsible (ie. a 1-to-1 relationship) for pain, and the fact that (from an Example I got from Mike Eisenhart) some one with a poorly moving C5-C6, (as best we can tell the difference and as valid as our hands may be) has a risk factor for future neck pains and problems.
No. Not causative, but a risk factor.
What you perceive today as a struggle is not truly due to the task at hand. It has to do with what the goals of the activity are.
The goal determines how the steps will play out. A worthy goal can bring you through any tough time. If the outcome is not of interest to you, no simple/light task is easy. It’s all a struggle if the goal is not meaningful. Continue reading
We associate many things with money. One example: If it costs more, it’s better.
Money is not just a physical item representative of some good or service. It has meaning past trade. Having more money does not just mean that you can accumulate more things. Socially, it states that maybe you have accomplished more, are a better decision maker, make better behavior choices, etc. It possesses status and other cultural attributions. Not a surprise. You know this.
The $15 beer will taste superior to the $1.50 beer. It just does, because we know it’s better. It’s contextual priming. That’s why blinded taste trials are often so interesting, because the context is removed and you are left with a singular sensory organ (taste organs of the tongue and mouth, yes and olfaction). Continue reading
How are we going to do this?
In other industries customer satisfaction is part of the delivery, but not directly tied to product price. Companies are “paid” by happy customers with more business (referral, word of mouth, etc), or market leverage to increase the cost of service (increased value of product) with customers happy to pay that increase due to increased value, to them.
This works in a market system, where individuals are in charge of their monetary decisions. But that isn’t health care.
In a move towards payment for outcomes, where will customer satisfaction have a role? (we don’t know whether we will be paid better for better outcomes, or paid a set fee for an average expected outcome and it’s up to us to beat that average… who knows)
Is there any talk of adding customer satisfaction directly to payment? Sometimes that’s all we have. No significant change in patient status, but a very satisfied customer with the care, service, advise and input given. Perhaps they leave with an understanding of their condition, ways to manage it and strategies to avoid deleterious effects of their disease/dysfunctional process… but no change in ROM, strength or patient reported outcome measures. Continue reading
You receive a call from your friend and fellow DPT classmate to evaluate her neck… the patient herself is a physical therapist by occupation. A healthy and fit 29 year old female, 5’0″, 115lbs. She reports she is having some cervical musculoskeletal issues going on. She has an achy pain in the bilateral upper traps., levator scapula, and peri-cervical muscles. She is limited by pain with the following cervical motions: right side-bend, right rotation and extension. No signs of central or peripheral neurological issues.
You are an experienced PT and have completed many cervical manipulations on a patient like this and it’s the end of your day. So you are going to do a quick favor for a friend and manipulate her neck, complete some STM, and maybe some PROM/SNAGs/isometrics/METs or whatever your favorite manual therapy technique is. What could go wrong? She’s a therapist herself so she wouldn’t miss anything serious. Being that you are friends you want to do some “magic” giving her some relief of symptoms. So… snap, crackle, manip. You move into some PROM and she reports severe vertigo, nausea, double vision, and you notice hemi-facial asymmetries as she talks about her onset of symptoms. Now what? Your table, your hands, your patient. Continue reading
Five Days of Fallacies: Day 1 here, Day 2 here, Day 3 here, Day 4 here. I have discussed some common mistakes we humans make in reasoning, in the hope that you can 1) Understand what they are 2) Recognize them when others speak 3) Recognize them when you think this way 4) Attempt to correct your thinking on old, current and future ideas.
The Fallacist’s Fallacy (I like saying that) refers to an argument being refuted, simply because it uses a fallicious approach, not because the content is false. For example: “These old-school classic basketball shoes always hold up better.” (an appeal to antiquity). The argument commits a fallacy (they are old = they are better), but perhaps they are constructed with more craftsmanship or durable supplies, so the content may still be true. (*are we to assume more craftsmanship and better supplies make a better B-Ball shoe?! Oh my, don’t let me make assumptions here!)
The Gambler’s Fallacy is also a nice one to be aware of. Continue reading
Five Days of Fallacies: Day 1 here, Day 2 here, Day 3 here, Day 5 here. I am discussing some common mistakes we humans make in reasoning, in the hope that you can 1) Understand what they are 2) Recognize them when others speak 3) Recognize them when you think this way 4) Attempt to correct your thinking on old, current and future ideas.
The Circular Argument, or Begging the Question. “Fascia is a tissue in the body that holds one’s emotions. I know this because the research I did indicates that releasing fascia results in released emotions. Therefore, fascia holds our emotions.” In my opinion, these fallacies are very hard to understand and uncover in conversation. In circular arguments the conclusion of the statement is stated up front, and any statement after that simply restates the presumed conclusion.
Let me give a simple example: “Everyone is using METs at the hip because they are so popular right now!” Did you catch it? Continue reading
Five Days of Fallacies: Day 1 here, Day 2 here, Day 4 here, Day 5 here. I am discussing some common mistakes we humans make in reasoning, in the hope that you can 1) Understand what they are 2) Recognize them when others speak 3) Recognize them when you think this way 4) Attempt to correct your thinking on old, current and future ideas.
Irrelevant Appeals are seen often when someone is trying to persuade you. This can be during an argument, debate, casual discussion, sales pitch, etc. The irrelevance is to the point at hand, it may seem like an important retort, however, it has no bearing on the facts. Some examples:
Appeal to Antiquity: The idea is valid, because it has been around for a long time. “This is traditional natural medicine, it was done this way for 2,000 years,of course it’s valid.” Well, many old ideas and practices are bad. The antiquity of an idea has no bearing on it’s usefulness. Bloodletting, lobotomies, acupuncture, essential oils, they are all old, right?
Appeal to Novelty: The opposite of above. “The newest thoughts on how to treat X are ABC.” The newness is irrelevant, but it seems better, right? Continue reading