I understand the trend toward patient-empowerment, trying to build self-efficacy without risking dependency on the clinician. This has elevated the interventions of education and exercise over manual therapy in terms of best-practice recommendations for physical therapists.
As a long-term PT, I can understand this movement, but the trend comes at a price.
First off is the belief that manual therapy, viewed as a passive intervention, should be dosed sparingly as to not encourage dependency. In contrast, I contend that if manual therapy allows movement with less fear, pain, and caution, this, in itself, builds independence.
I do accept that more common view of PT is the exercise-based model, though I have HUGE issues with intellectual lazy PTs who blame weakness on pain. What I don’t and will not accept is an apparent lack of engagement on the part of my profession.
I have great respect for the time, patience, money, and emotional investment that a budding PT student makes to become a DPT, as it is not an easy path. But what are we building?
Recently I had dropped my car off for a service at a local repair facility. Rather than join the squad impatient chair-sitters, waiting for word of the bill in need of payment, I chose instead to take a long walk. This walk afforded me an opportunity to cruise through the nearby picturesque village, able to see the sights while getting my exercise. My walk took me past the village PT clinic…twice, once on my outbound journey, and again on my way back to the garage.
On my first pass, I was easily able to view a good handful of patients dutifully working out on at their respective stations, all seeming to be completely engaged in their tasks. But at the center of the facility, I viewed two individuals who I am assuming where the resident PTs. How did I know this?
Apparel, for one. They were the only ones NOT engaged.
Instead, they stood side by side, talking with each other, in the dreaded arms-crossed posture. Argh! OK, I thought, as I passed, maybe I caught them at a bad moment. Maybe it was a fluke. I’ll take a look on my way back, hoping that they would not be caught in such a compromising position.
The walk took me through the rest of the village and, with a bit of a divergence, along a roaring creek. Quite lovely. But as I again approached the PT clinic my suspicions rose and, sure enough, there they stood. Maybe they have moved and returned to the exact same spot to converse again…or maybe not. But there they stood, arms-crossed and conversing, while their patients dutifully went through their paces.
A PT may argue that those patients were engaged in self-helping behaviors, learning self-reliance, and building upon their own potential. Quite possibly.
But why did the PTs need to be standing there so unengaged? We can be more than arm crossers, we can be cheerleaders, encouragers, coaches, teachers, and, yes, occasionally, applying manual interventions. Self-reliance is key, but what has the PT profession become; a bunch of arm crossers? Manual therapy PT has its own skulls in the closet, but that’s not what this post is about. It’s about arm crossing.
My bias is toward using manual therapy as a primary intervention and evidence exists for this as a viable treatment strategy. I strongly discourage dependency of any sort and abhor it in other professionals. My work is set up to empower my patient to feel like they can move and with less fear. I teach them to self-treat, based on my examples, and make it a strong encouragement to engage in the movement of their choosing. I recognize that a good majority of patients seen for exercise-based PT improve, though those that don’t often come through my door.
As a profession, PT and other similar professions, the view of us by the public matters. Arm-crossing and spending a good amount of your time conversing with your peer instead of your patient is simply a lame way to spend medical dollars, not to mention a very expensive education.
Next time I make that walk, my hope is to see PTs engaged with their patient. They may not be touching, using manual therapy as I do, but I hope to see them spending time speaking to their patients, coaching and encouraging, aiding and correcting, prescribing, and adapting. I hope to see them doing the things our profession(s) are capable of and not resorting to the stereotypes that pockmark our profession.
https://themtdc.com/wp-content/uploads/Untitled-design-66.png6381037Walt Fritzhttps://themtdc.com/wp-content/uploads/logo.svgWalt Fritz2020-06-09 07:19:402020-06-09 07:19:40Crossed Arm Syndrome
The Prone Press Up is one of the best ways to prevent and treat acute low back pain. Even if you get a massage, adjustment/manipulation, or other treatment in a clinic, you still need to maintain the improvement at home (unless you want to pay for a passive solution forever).
A patient is more likely to get better if they do a high dosage of repetitions throughout the day of whatever resets their system. If it hurts, they’re less likely to dose or to get to end range. Here are some of my favorite ways to make the prone press up pain-free or to eliminate the perception of tightness at end range
Any or all of these strategies should make the press up pain-free or as comfortable as possible so a high dosage should be easier to accomplish.
https://themtdc.com/wp-content/uploads/Press-Up-Massage-Therapy.png6871036Erson Religiosohttps://themtdc.com/wp-content/uploads/logo.svgErson Religioso2020-05-26 07:48:422020-05-26 07:48:42Level Up The Prone Press Up
Whether rehab exercises should be painful or not has become a recent topic of much discussion. As we have started to value the role of (optimal) loading in rehab, and that we can get patients back to moving and loading pretty early in the rehab process, we have also got to appreciate that this is unlikely to happen without experiencing any pain.
If you have any type of understanding about pain then the simple question of “should we use painful exercise?” suddenly might not look so simple!
Rather than a simple yes or no, there are a bunch of questions to be answered, such as how much pain is OK? Who may or may not benefit? And what is the best way to manage the process? Especially if all does not go to plan!
From a data standpoint it would be great if we had have something that we can use to guide us here. Low and behold we do, and its open access.
This systematic review and meta analysis looked at 9 trials in which varying degrees of painful exercise were used. They found that painful exercise did NOT result in statistically worse outcomes across a short, medium or long term follow up. There was a small statistical benefit in the short-term for painful exercises as highlighted by the standardised mean difference of around 0.2 (SMD = effect size for a meta analysis). So from a research standpoint this is positive news.
One thing to note here from a clinical standpoint is, that using painful exercise is no GUARANTEE that it will have a positive effect for your patient. All statistical tests only give us the PROBABILITY of an effect, so the likelihood is that it will, but when we look at the confidence intervals (measure of variability) for the mean SMD for painful exercise, for the majority of the studies we can also see that they cross into a negative effect and in some of the studies quite substantially.
The variable effect of exercise on pain (although over a shorter time frame) was also shown by O Neill et al’s recent look at the acute effects of isometrics *Here*. Although, of course, isometric exercise and painful exercise is not the same thing, the point here is the highlighting of the variable effects from exercise. For patients with higher baseline pain isometrics actually increased their pain post exercise and this is the benefit of looking at individual responders within a study not just the group average. Those with lower pain at baseline seemed to receive more analgesia from isometric exercise.
BUT at the very least I think we can say that the likelihood is that it will not have detrimental effect. So as rehab can often be painful we can be reasonably confident but without seeing painful exercise as some sort of fire and forget panacea and also appreciate the individual nature of pain.
We could debate the mechanisms of HOW painful exercise might work from pain habituation to conditioned pain modulation and perceptual mechanisms but in essence we don’t really know at this point in time and this might be different or in different combinations for different people.
The benefits can be both physical AND psychological.
Firstly, it allows patients to get in MORE exercise. If they are not being limited by pain (or pain contingent if we are being fancy :) then they can get a greater dosing than if they stopped due to it being painful. It is important to add though that we currently don’t know what optimal dosing is for exercise having an effect on pain!
Secondly, it sends the message that hurt does not equal harm. The problem can be painful and still settle down if managed in the right way. This may give people a new insight into their pain and how they can manage it.
Pain self-efficacy may also be built experientially, so using painful exercise as a tool might be an option to help do this.
So it’s great to have some objective data on this subject, but as we know getting that into clinical application is not always straightforward.
Firstly don’t be afraid of some pain! The likelihood is that it won’t cause a worse outcome. But as we are dealing with thinking, feeling HUMANS, it is OF COURSE not as simple as this, but more on that later.
One of the issues with always looking to be pain free with exercise or continually treating pain, is what does that say ABOUT pain? On one hand we are telling people hurt does not mean harm but our actions might not be saying the same thing. If pain is OK, if it is normal then in the process of getting it better we might have to endure a little bit of it.
But how much is OK is a key question? Studies that have allowed painful exercise have ranged from not increasing baseline symptoms during or post exercise up to 5/10 on the VAS.
We know the limitations of the VAS as a REALLY subjective scale so perhaps we could introduce the idea of pain being tolerable or intolerable rather than a numerical score.
Now tolerable might be a bit sore but it does not really get in the way. Intolerable might be thought of as getting in the way of our daily activates, maybe having an effect on our sleep and generally making life a bit miserable. This is going to be different for different folk so hence why the concept of tolerable becomes important.
We would also like to know how the pain is settling down. So pain that is not really calming down after the exercise stimulus or keeps on getting progressively worse over a number of days as the exercises are performed is probably not a great idea. We would like to see a nice stimulus response with only slight increases above baseline (tolerable remember : ) that calms down gradually over 24-36 hours, quite similar to delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS)
So on the issue of DOMS, it is important to identify if the increase in pain is actually the same as the original symptom. Post exercise soreness is quite normal but for those that are unaccustomed to exercise this might not be recognisable especially for a currently painful area. Defining what is pain and what is soreness might be a good sense making exercise for some patients. Although we don’t know that progressive overload is required with exercise in rehab, it probably ia a good idea, so having some sort of tolerable baseline for patients to progress or regress from is a great idea too. This is also might have an effect their self efficacy using exercise too which, of course, is a bonus.
Pain Is Not The Only Issue
Potentially the most problematic area with painful exercise, and one that is really under discussed, may be more about the psychological aspects that are associated with the pain and how they can affect the person. One of the best prognostic factors for recovery in a number of body areas appears to be pain self efficacy, *here* is a recent paper from Chester et al and also from Foster et al *here* Pain self efficacy, something I have written about before also *here*, is the ability to carry on normal functioning despite of pain. It is important to note that those with higher pain self efficacy also tend to adhere to exercise better.
So someone’s pain self efficacy is going to be a KEY factor in whether they are able to tolerate having pain and being able to carry on functioning which maybe a fundamental skill at the heart of painful exercise especially if it can take 24-36 hrs to settle.
Predicted outcome is another key prognostic factor and if someone believes that increased pain will result in a negative outcome then this could have a negative effect on the actual outcome.
Jack et al *here* found that the number one reason for poor adherence to exercise programs was that people did not want to make the problem worse. So painful exercise coupled with negative beliefs about pain, low pain self efficacy and a poor predicted outcome may not sit well together.
One caveat with using questionnaires, in my opinion : ), is it does allow us to get a score to assess confidence and resilience in managing pain but it perhaps does not tell us about things that are specific to our patients. So being able to weave this into a good subjective that teases these more personal parts of the narrative out is a must.
Also ASK about their expected outcome from the treatment and what would it mean to you if it was painful.
“Do you feel like this exercise will work for you?”
“Do you have any concerns about doing this exercise?”
It might be that someone tells you that they have tried exercises before and they did not work or that they feel it might make the issue worse, especially if it hurts.
It might also be important to discuss with ALL patients what their beliefs are around pain. These might be that pain indicates they are doing more damage to their bodies or they will not be able to work because they have pain or implications for future functioning. It can often be what the pain MEANS to the patient that is the real issue rather than just the sensation of the pain itself.
A key factor to remember is regardless of whether painful exercise is positive or no worse than non painful exercise, a negative belief may stop your patient from exercising
One of the most powerful tools we have at our disposal is EDUCATION, I am not always a huge fan of this term as it can imply a teacher pupil relationship. But in order to provide effective education to people we first have to build rapport and then understand what they may need to know more about.
We can educate on a range of things from the effectiveness of exercise for many issues, that painful exercise is often not detrimental, that pain self efficacy is an important prognostic factor and what pain may actually mean and its relationship with physical damage. It may also be worth talking about the process and what to expect, and often that it is a process of trial and error to get the right level and desired response.
This has to start with understanding the patient, their history and belief structure.
Where You Start Is Not Where You Have To Finish
Do we have to jump straight into painful exercise? I don’t think so. It is not REQUIRED but it is also not harmful.
An important point to make is that for someone with very negative beliefs about pain, reduced pain self efficacy and poor beliefs about the outcome, challenging them right off the bat with painful exercise might not always be the best thing to do. As they build trust in you and confidence in their bodies then pushing into pain progressively might sometimes be a better route.
We know that giving people the option to avoid pain can actually maintain pain avoidance, so whilst not advocating avoidance behaviour confronting these things may take a little time, confidence and education, especially if the person has a lot of negative pain and avoidance based beliefs.
Those that persist in doing painful things that have NOT provide a therapeutic effect may benefit from non painful exercise for a while too. If you feel that pushing into pain has not given the desired response when looking at their history then a break or change in dosage could be just the ticket.
Those with higher levels of pain at baseline on average seem to have worse clinical outcomes so this might also lead me to reason that maintaining this level of pain through exercise might not always be a good idea.
There are no real hard and fast rules here only individuals and individual considerations.
What If It All Goes Wrong???
This is where self efficacy may come into its own. Empowering your patients to self manage maybe valuable in the exercise process.
As we hopefully have told the patient BEFORE they embark on an exercise program I can often be trial and error. Have we enabled our patients to adapt their exercise dosage if it goes a bit wrong? *Here*is a short piece on dosage in rehab
So do your patients know what to look out for in terms of symptoms?
Do they know how to adjust the dosage? This could be in exercise frequency, intensity and time, sets and reps (volume).
Are they able to contact you to ask questions? Do they know this?
I think these are all required aspects of pushing into pain.
A patient I saw last week had religiously persisted at pushing into his painful rehab exercises every 48hrs. He believed if he did what he was told he would get better (the trust!). But after 3 months there was not the desired outcome. In this case he was given no indication what to do if this happened, just blind faith on all sides that he would get better.
Painful exercise DOES NOT produce worse outcomes from the research we have
Research does not guarantee your patients response to painful exercise
It is not just about the PAIN sensation! What does the pain mean and how does it affect behaviour such as exercise adherence?
Pain self efficacy and predicted outcome are important psychological measures and can be discussed and measured
Think about education around the exercise and the pain response
It does not need to start with painful exercise!
Empower your patients to self manage
https://themtdc.com/wp-content/uploads/Massage-Therapy-Painful-Rehab.png6871036Ben Cormackhttps://themtdc.com/wp-content/uploads/logo.svgBen Cormack2020-05-18 20:07:562020-05-18 20:07:56Painful Exercise In Rehab – Yes, No, Or A Lot To Think About
In all honesty in its current format the answer here has to be an unreserved YES, we should STOP assessing movement.
This opinion is based on the two predominant concepts we appear to have currently when assessing movement.
Firstly the concept that a deviation from a movement or muscle firing ‘ideal’ is the cause of someone’s pain such as seen with the pathokinesiology model.
Secondly that we can also ‘screen’ movement to identify faulty movement that might lead to injury, this is FAR too big a subject to get into but it seems we weekly have new data suggesting screening does not fulfil the role it was designed for.
Both of these concepts have so far proved to be elusive in providing concrete evidence that they do exactly what they say they do.
A modern understanding of all the contributors to pain means the likelihood of pain being consistently caused by one single factor across ALL people is pretty absurd really.
The more we study movement the more we find that it is in essence highly variable. This variability is not only between people but even the same person seems to move differently when they repeat a movement. It has been suggested, and with a fair amount of evidence, that healthy movement is variable and losing variability may be a problem within itself. It is important to realise this about movement because it allows us to appraise the idea of movement assessment more critically.
Now this means that being able to identify a ‘faulty’ movement pattern will be highly likely if you are measuring it against a singular ‘ideal’ version. The problem is the singular ideal version does not really exist and also does not seem to be linked to very much, rendering the whole process a bit of a waste of time.
It makes little sense not to be variable:
Multiple options affords us redundancy
Ability to respond to varying stimulus
Spreading load over a joint in repetitive tasks
Avoiding fatigue through variable motor unit recruitment
Unavoidable at a biological level
We also may go further down the rabbit hole in that some now ASSUME that pain is simply the RESULT of a faulty movement pattern without any kind of critical analysis at all. Think how some people approach back pain, “Its your TvA not be firing” rather than lets find out if it is or not (obviously no clinical test tells us this, just an example).
MOVEMENT DOES NOT EQUAL FORCE
Now I am no biomechanist but we also must realise that just because a movement goes into a potentially ‘faulty’ position does not tell us the whole picture of how much damage that poses to a tissue. Sure it might increase the risk in some contexts but alone it does not give you the ACTUAL force applied and we would also need to know the acceleration as well. A fast movement within proposed ‘safe’ parameters that generates a large force (F=MA) could provide a much greater load to a tissue than one that was proposed as ‘faulty’ that moved much slower.
In fact under greater loads our movement seems to change, so assessing in a low load environment may not give you an indication of how movement is in another situation. This was an interesting piece from Frost et al *Here* showing exactly that!
Some seem to have developed the idea that if you get a movement right you can put it under ANY load. The way the body manages loads internally through the way it moves may be far LESS important the overall volume of load that the body may go through overall and this could be in volume, frequency or intensity.
A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE?
So can we STILL look at movement in practice?, I believe so. Everything has it uses and limitations and its working out WHEN thats the tough bit.
Pain DOES have an effect on the way we move, this is pretty well researched showing alterations in what happens with both kinematics AND kinetics at a joint, to adjacent joints and right up to avoiding movement completely for fear of pain. This is a great paper by Hodges & Smeets discussing this*HERE*
Like any other thing that we can measure, it may or may not be related to the problem and may or may not have to change to get a successful result.
Certainly it very difficult to suggest that the way someone moves is a cause of their problems. Do you know what it looked like before? Could it be the RESULT not the cause or pain? BUT is there also a possibility that a change in movement strategy COULD also have an effect on reoccurrence or another injury. We know that the best predictor of future injury is previous injury *Here* and this could be a factor. This has also been mooted with back pain *Here*.
It is a good place to use your reasoning skills. Is this the first time it has happened? Is it acute? Both of these simple questions might help to determine if it is currently an adaptive strategy (helpful) because of pain or is it a maladaptive behaviour (unhelpful) that maybe contributing to the maintenance or reoccurrence of a problem.
LOOK AT THE INDIVIDUAL
A potentially more individualised concept for how we view movement is that rather than a binary right and wrong view that we have currently, we could say your current strategy is unhelpful and swapping that for another might be more helpful, there are often a whole bunch of other ways that could be beneficial rather than the ‘right’ way.
This might only be for the short term, such as a symptom modification, or for the longer term if you believe a movement behaviour maybe coupled with a pain response.
Gait re-eduction for runners seems to follow this rationale, see whats going on, does that potentially relate to the issue and can we subtly alter it.
Now there maybe certain scenarios that do carry more risk such as loaded lumbar flexion or extreme knee valgus but they seem to be pretty load related. Unless someone is regularly under these loads perhaps it matters less. But ask yourself how many people in the gym have popped an ACL doing a single leg squat? Perhaps the caution can cause more problems than it solves here? Especially with the unhelpful beliefs people seem to be prone to forming.
SOME EXAMPLES OF UNHELPFUL
IT COULD BE THAT A MOVEMENT LOADS A SPECIFIC BODY PART THAT IS CURRENTLY SENSITIVE
If some one has a very hip driven strategy whilst currently suffering from a proximal hamstring tendinopathy altering this could reduce further load/compression to the tendon to allow it to desensitise.
PRE MOVEMENT BEHAVIOURS
It could be that be that someone is bracing BEFORE they move and this is an unhelpful component. This maybe seen with lower back pain sufferers.
Before bending over to do their shoelaces someone specifically braces and this has become coupled with the pain they are experiencing. Attempting to change this part of the motor strategy MAY affect the outcome.
IT COULD BE THEY ONLY HAVE ONE MOVEMENT STRATEGY
We see decreased variation linked with chronic pain at a number of areas of the body. This could cause repetitive loading or consistent patterns ASSOCIATED with pain.
A specific task maybe is performed in a repetitive way. This might be the way someone lifts, reaches or even runs. A way to assess this could be to provide variable challenges and see how well someone can adapt.
What we do have to remember that this is all TRIAL & ERROR.
It may or MAY NOT have an effect and essentially this is everything we do. We should try to be informed by current best evidence but also remember is just a probability generated in a controlled environment and may not directly translate to this person you are dealing with.
Specific movement ideals are pretty unsupported, especially linking them to pain
Movement screening is literally a can of worms
Movement is variable, EMBRACE it! This means it is tough to assume causative link with pain
Low load assessment tells little about high load behaviour
A movement does not simple equal the force applied to the tissue
Look at the individual
Be prepared that altering movement may have NO EFFECT or a very positive one
https://themtdc.com/wp-content/uploads/Massage-Therapist-Assessing-Movement-x2.jpg9001800Ben Cormackhttps://themtdc.com/wp-content/uploads/logo.svgBen Cormack2020-02-25 08:07:092020-03-02 09:39:41Are The Days Of Assessing Movement Over
First things first, I used to give credit where credit was due. That was a key part of The Eclectic Approach and Modern Manual Therapy. However, I received cease and desists for using the terminology of Institutes I don’t teach for – it’s not like I’m not giving credit where I originally learned these concepts!
If you or your patient has pain with squatting, try these variations
Tibial IR and Femoral ER with closed chain flexion
Tibial ER and Femoral IR with closed chain extension (coming up from the squat)
The patient I am talking about in the example (but not the PT I’m demoing on) had a patellar dislocation a few months ago and has been afraid to have his knee go into extension in all closed chain activities. With this Functional Mobilization, I restored threat free knee extension and was able to overpressure it at end range. It was also easy enough for the patient to replicate hourly for his Recovery Plan (what I am now calling the HEP).
https://themtdc.com/wp-content/uploads/Untitled-design-52-1.png400600Erson Religiosohttps://themtdc.com/wp-content/uploads/logo.svgErson Religioso2019-11-18 18:33:022019-11-18 18:33:02Functional Mobilization To Improve Squats
Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.
Essential Website Cookies
These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.
We provide you with a list of stored cookies on your computer in our domain so you can check what we stored. Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings.
Other external services
We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps, and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.
Google Webfont Settings:
Google Map Settings:
Google reCaptcha Settings:
Vimeo and Youtube video embeds: