Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Chiropractic & Manual Therapies 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research

An indication of current views of Australian general practitioners towards chiropractic and osteopathy: a cross-sectional study

Authors: Roger M. Engel, Robyn Beirman, Sandra Grace

Published in: Chiropractic & Manual Therapies | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

While the role of complementary medicine therapies such as chiropractic and osteopathy is yet to be clearly delineated in the Australian context, demand for these services remains high. The attitudes of general practitioners towards chiropractors and osteopaths may have played a part in producing this outcome. However, this view is based on data that were more than 10 years old. Current anecdotal evidence suggests that the previous level of support may be declining in sections of the Australian medical profession. An assessment of the current views of general practitioners towards chiropractors and osteopaths is called for. The results being reported here represent the first stage of this assessment.

Methods

This cross-sectional study was designed as a quantitative descriptive study using an anonymous online survey that included closed and open-ended questions with opportunities provided for free text. The target population was Australian general practitioners. Inclusion criteria included current medical registration, membership of the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners and currently practicing as a general practitioner in Australia. The data being reported here were collected between May and December, 2014.

Results

There were 630 respondents to the online survey during this period representing a response rate of 2.6 %. Results were not uniform for the two professions. More general practitioners believed chiropractic education was not evidence-based compared to osteopathic education (70 % and 50 % respectively) while scope of practice was viewed as similar for both professions. A majority of general practitioners had never referred a patient to either profession (chiropractic: 60 %; osteopathy: 66 %) with approximately two-thirds not interested in learning more about their education (chiropractors: 68 %; osteopaths: 63 %).

Conclusions

This study provides an indication of the current views of Australian general practitioners towards chiropractors and osteopaths. The findings suggest that attitudes may have become less favourable with a growing intolerance towards both professions. If confirmed, this has the potential to impact health service provision. The results from this cross-sectional study suggest that obtaining representative general practitioner views using online surveys is difficult and another approach is needed to supplement or replace the current recruitment strategy.'
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Cohen MM, Penman S, Pirotta M, Da Costa C. The integration of complementary therapies in Australian general practice: results of a national survey. J Altern Complement Med. 2005;11:995–1004.CrossRefPubMed Cohen MM, Penman S, Pirotta M, Da Costa C. The integration of complementary therapies in Australian general practice: results of a national survey. J Altern Complement Med. 2005;11:995–1004.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference MacLennan AH, Morrison RG. Tertiary education institutions should not offer pseudoscientific medical course (editorial). Med J Aust. 2012;196:225–6.CrossRefPubMed MacLennan AH, Morrison RG. Tertiary education institutions should not offer pseudoscientific medical course (editorial). Med J Aust. 2012;196:225–6.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference UK Back pain exercise and manipulation (UKBEAM) Trial Team. United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomised trial: Cost effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care. Br Med J. 2004;329:1381–5.CrossRef UK Back pain exercise and manipulation (UKBEAM) Trial Team. United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomised trial: Cost effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care. Br Med J. 2004;329:1381–5.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Rubinstein S, van Middelkoop M, Assendelft W, de Boer N, van Tulder M. Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low-back pain: An update of a Cochrane review. Spine. 2011;36:E825–46.CrossRefPubMed Rubinstein S, van Middelkoop M, Assendelft W, de Boer N, van Tulder M. Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low-back pain: An update of a Cochrane review. Spine. 2011;36:E825–46.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference French S, Densley K, Charity M, Gunn J. Who uses Australian Chiropractic Services? Chiropractic & Man Ther. 2013;21:31.CrossRef French S, Densley K, Charity M, Gunn J. Who uses Australian Chiropractic Services? Chiropractic & Man Ther. 2013;21:31.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Xue CC, Zhang AL, Lin V, Da Costa C, Story DF. Complementary and alternative medicine use in Australia: a national population-based survey. J Altern Complement Med. 2007;13:643–50.CrossRefPubMed Xue CC, Zhang AL, Lin V, Da Costa C, Story DF. Complementary and alternative medicine use in Australia: a national population-based survey. J Altern Complement Med. 2007;13:643–50.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Murthy V, Sibbritt DW, Adams J. An integrative review of complementary and alternative medicine use for back pain: a focus on prevalence, reasons for use, influential factors, self-perceived effectiveness, and communication. Spine J. 2015;15:1870–83.CrossRefPubMed Murthy V, Sibbritt DW, Adams J. An integrative review of complementary and alternative medicine use for back pain: a focus on prevalence, reasons for use, influential factors, self-perceived effectiveness, and communication. Spine J. 2015;15:1870–83.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Wardle JL, Sibbritt DW, Adams J. Referrals to chiropractors and osteopaths: a survey of general practitioners in rural and regional New South Wales, Australia. Chiropr Man Therap. 2013;21:5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Wardle JL, Sibbritt DW, Adams J. Referrals to chiropractors and osteopaths: a survey of general practitioners in rural and regional New South Wales, Australia. Chiropr Man Therap. 2013;21:5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Easthope G, Tranter B, Gill G. Normal medical practice of referring patients for complementary therapies among Australian general practitioners. Complement Ther Med. 2000;8:226–33.CrossRefPubMed Easthope G, Tranter B, Gill G. Normal medical practice of referring patients for complementary therapies among Australian general practitioners. Complement Ther Med. 2000;8:226–33.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Pirotta MV, Cohen MM, Kotsirilos V, Farish SJ. Complementary therapies: have they become accepted in general practice? Med J Aust. 2000;172:105–9.PubMed Pirotta MV, Cohen MM, Kotsirilos V, Farish SJ. Complementary therapies: have they become accepted in general practice? Med J Aust. 2000;172:105–9.PubMed
22.
go back to reference Garner MJ, Birmingham M, Aker P, Moher D, Balon J, Keenan D, et al. Developing Integrative Primary Healthcare Delivery: Adding a Chiropractor to the Team. Explore (NY). 2008;4:18–24.CrossRef Garner MJ, Birmingham M, Aker P, Moher D, Balon J, Keenan D, et al. Developing Integrative Primary Healthcare Delivery: Adding a Chiropractor to the Team. Explore (NY). 2008;4:18–24.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Westin D, Tandberg T, John C, Axen I. GPs opinions and perceptions of chiropractic in Sweden and Norway: a descriptive survey. Chiropr Man Therap. 2013;21:29.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Westin D, Tandberg T, John C, Axen I. GPs opinions and perceptions of chiropractic in Sweden and Norway: a descriptive survey. Chiropr Man Therap. 2013;21:29.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Langworthy JM, Birkelid J. General practice and chiropractic in Norway: how well do they communicate and what do GPs want to know? J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2001;24:576–81.CrossRefPubMed Langworthy JM, Birkelid J. General practice and chiropractic in Norway: how well do they communicate and what do GPs want to know? J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2001;24:576–81.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Flatt J. Critical discourse analysis of rhetoric against complementary medicine. Creative Approaches to Res. 2013;6:57–70. Flatt J. Critical discourse analysis of rhetoric against complementary medicine. Creative Approaches to Res. 2013;6:57–70.
26.
go back to reference Brosnan C. ‘Quackery’ in the Academy? Professional knowledge, autonomy and the debate over complementary medicine degrees. Sociology. 2015;49:1047–64.CrossRef Brosnan C. ‘Quackery’ in the Academy? Professional knowledge, autonomy and the debate over complementary medicine degrees. Sociology. 2015;49:1047–64.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Agresti A. Categorical data analysis. 3rd ed. Hoboken: Wiley; 2013. Agresti A. Categorical data analysis. 3rd ed. Hoboken: Wiley; 2013.
33.
go back to reference Myers SP, Xue CC, Cohen MM. The legitimacy of academic complementary medicine: Standing for common sense. Med J Aust. 2012;197:69–70.CrossRefPubMed Myers SP, Xue CC, Cohen MM. The legitimacy of academic complementary medicine: Standing for common sense. Med J Aust. 2012;197:69–70.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
An indication of current views of Australian general practitioners towards chiropractic and osteopathy: a cross-sectional study
Authors
Roger M. Engel
Robyn Beirman
Sandra Grace
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 2045-709X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12998-016-0119-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Chiropractic & Manual Therapies 1/2016 Go to the issue