In this paper an argument is presented for the urgent need to reinvigorate our research agenda with a focus on the study of therapeutic alliance or therapeutic relationships, which are central to the art and practice of physical therapy.
This is a position paper with a relevant literature review. The authors suggest that the profession has begun to lose sight of an essential "thing that makes us physical therapists." This phenomenon is fueled by an overemphasis on quantitative research and an under-appreciation of clinical expertise and patient values. This imbalance undermines holistic patient-centered approaches.
Market-driven efficiencies in a data-based healthcare environment are stealing time from physical therapy. The authors propose that rigorously produced qualitative and mixed methods studies will yield ample evidence of the importance of the therapeutic relationship to patient outcomes. Such evidence would place the profession in a position to argue for the necessity of time in physical therapy.
Applicants to physical therapy programs say they value the time that the profession, historically, has afforded them with patients. Patients also speak to how much they value that time. The best hope for protecting the time we have with our patients is to graduate generations of therapists who embrace the therapeutic alliance and recognize that time intentionally spent is essential to developing therapeutic relationships.
Conclusions/Relevance to the conference theme: The Pursuit of Excellence in Physical Therapy Education
We need to promote education that fosters engagement and embodied knowledge.
The authors suggest that excellence in PT education must incorporate curricula addressing the vital importance of therapeutic alliance and also include training in the skills for developing such unique intentional relationships.
1. Besley J, Kayes NM, McPherson KM. Assessing therapeutic relationships in physiotherapy: literature review. New Zealand Journal of Physiotherapy. 2011;39(2):81-91 11p.
2. Ferreira PH, Ferreira ML, Maher CG, Refshauge KM, Latimer J, Adams RD. The Therapeutic Alliance Between Clinicians and Patients Predicts Outcome in Chronic Low Back Pain. Physical Therapy. 2013;93(4):470-478 9p. doi:10.2522/ptj.20120137.
3. Frankel RM. Relationship-centered Care and the Patient-Physician Relationship. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19(11):1163-1165. doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.40901.x.
4. Fuentes Contreras JP. Therapeutic Contextual Factors in Physiotherapy: Magnitude, Mechanisms and Contributors of Placebo Mediated Analgesia in Chronic Low Back Pain. January 2013.
5. Jensen GM, Gwyer J, Shepard KF. Expert practice in physical therapy. Phys Ther. 2000;80(1):28-43; discussion 44-52.
6. Kayes NM, McPherson KM. Human technologies in rehabilitation: “Who” and “How” we are with our clients. Disability & Rehabilitation. 2012;34(22):1907-1911 5p. doi:10.3109/09638288.2012.670044.
7. Resnik L, Jensen GM. Using clinical outcomes to explore the theory of expert practice in physical therapy. Phys Ther. 2003;83(12):1090-1106.
8. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ. 1996;312(7023):71-72.
9. Swinkels A, Albarran JW, Means RI, Mitchell T, Stewart MC. Evidence-based practice in health and social care: where are we now? J Interprof Care. 2002;16(4):335-347. doi:10.1080/1356182021000008265.
10. Williams GC, Frankel RM, Campbell TL, Deci EL. Research on relationship-centered care and healthcare outcomes from the Rochester biopsychosocial program: A self-determination theory integration. Families, Systems, & Health. 2000;18(1):79-90. doi:10.1037/h0091854.