top of page
AdobeStock_352149697.jpeg

The osteopathic distinction: fact or fancy?

Cite

Full Text Link

Books and documents

-

Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment

J Med Humanit. 1993 Winter;14(4):203-22.

Authors:

J F Peppin

Abstract.

Since osteopathic medicine's inception its distinction has been proclaimed steadfastly in the osteopathic literature. The uniqueness has been claimed to reside in: (1) rigid adherence to A.T. Still's tenets; (2) osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT); (3) claims of "holism"; (4) "osteopathic principles", (5) esoteric definitions; and (6) other suggested differences. None of these claims can be successfully defended. An aspect of the osteopathic distinction may lie in the didactic of OMT per se. Certain experiences in medical school contribute to the "reconstruction" of the student's view of the patient. Touch, through OMT, may be a quality that affects this change and helps make the osteopathic physician different. When blended with traditional medical modalities this may result in a unique medical perspective. The ideal approach for the osteopathic profession would be an honest evaluation of its function in society and its uniqueness in medicine. The profession may discover a uniqueness with touch as an integral part.

Publication Date: 

1993 Jan

OEID: 

933

Peppin, FJ. (1993) 'The osteopathic distinction: fact or fancy? ', J Med Humanit. 1993 Winter;14(4):203-22.

Sponsored by 

logo-footer-k.png

Search    Explore    About    Join    Web Policy     Contact Us

​

Copyright © 2023 OsteoEvidence. All Rights Reserved.
 

bottom of page