Health knowledge made personal
Join this community!
› Share page:
Search posts:

NY Times Suggests Physical Therapy is "VooDoo"

Posted Jan 07 2010 8:49am

Check out Gina Kolata's article in "Treat Me but No Tricks Please" in yesterday's issue.

Below is the response I submitted.


Well, first off, the $150 charge for physical therapy is likely NOT what the angry doctor actually paid. In most cases, the patient pays a co-pay (~$20) and insurance pays a contracted amount which is usually half or less of the billed amount. Second, the confounding issue here is a third party pays for services rendered and the market is not deciding the value. If there was no coverage for physical therapy, as is the case for PRP, then the patient can decide if the service is worth the money. And third, you don't prove a profession via studies. You prove or disprove techniques. Saying physical therapy is ineffective because stretching doesn't work is like saying orthopedic surgery is a waste of time because arthroscopic debridement of a joint doesn't work. Physical therapy is a profession; not ultrasound, electrical stimulation or ice/heat.


What do you think? What has been your experience?

Post a comment
Write a comment: