OSTEOPATHY AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

The mechanistic way of thinking, present in the western culture since the Greek atomists, dominates a big part of the medical research. People are scientifical objects, combinations of diverse elements, subject to physical and chemical influences of things happening within them and in their environment. Scientific research is seeking for explanations and prognostications within the already known physical laws, and it is doing this by means of objective measuring-instruments. Things falling short of the already known laws or impossible to be measured objectively, are prone to be banished from scientific research.

On the one hand, this contains one of the biggest contradictions in the human thinking. The mechanistic way of thinking is a conception of subjective thinking, considering the human being as a scientifical object, and not as a subject.

On the other hand, all establishments are made on the base of knowledge and measuring-instruments being available at that moment.

It is impossible to fit in the conceptions existing within the osteopathic medicine in a mechanistic way of thinking. In our view, this has to be imputed to a lack of knowledge of existing influences, able or unable to be presented objectively.

To some degree, osteopathy is situated between the purely western scientifical medical thinking, on the one hand, and the sociological and psychological ways of thinking, on the other hand. But, in our opinion both possibilities have already given sufficient proofs of their usefulness, so that their integration must be possible.

In the history of osteopathy we find ‘mechanistic’ ideas and ‘holistic’ ideas as well:

Mechanistic way of thinking: the cause of sickness can be reduced to a mechanic disturbance, after recovery automatically resulting in healing and health.
Holistic way of thinking:

The osteopath doesn’t treat a sickness, but he treats a sick human being.
While medicine has applied for a long time to the cause and the mechanism of the healthdisturbing elements, the osteopath accentuates the healthmaintaining elements.
Basically, allopathic medicine is pathogenetically oriented and osteopathy salutogenetically (also hygeoigenetically)n.

Holism can’t be an excuse in order to banish scientific research. On the contrary we think that holistic ways of thinking have to function as a framework for a scientific reasoning about a healthy human functioning.

But for pragmatic reasons we are also obliged to use reductionistic analyses, as well in our investigations as in our treatments.

These analyses get their full value, when we realize that we don’t deal with syndromes, but with people, and when we accentuate the health aspect. From a scientific, philosophic and osteopathic vision, the endeavour to an integration of reductionist and holistic ways of thinking can contribute to a more fundamental knowledge of human functioning.

The methodology in the osteopathic scientific research has to follow as much as possible the generally accepted rules. But we should have the intention to search for new methodological possibilities that agree with the osteopathic concept.

On the other hand we establisch that within the professional group the osteopathic concept is taken for granted. The final aim of a valid examination in osteopathic medicine consists in proving the value of this concept. So we have to elaborate researches that criticise our own concept.

In order to get a clear insight in the relation between cause and result, an equilibrium between the framework of thinking about multicausality and the statistic requirements has to be pursued in order to get reliable results.

Doing fundamental research or a study of the effects of osteopathic techniques, much attention has to be given to placebo-techniques, having to be as valuable as possible, and to the control of ‘blinding’ of subjects, observers and analysts.

With regard to clinical research of the efficiency of a full osteopathic treatment, CORPP supports the design of ‘black box’ making qualitative measurings. CORPP will also make researches in order to examine the value of these methodological rules and research methods.

Both, basic and clinical research have to be a part of bigger research projects. These projects want to stress on the reciprocal relationship between basic and clinical research. So we hope that in the long term the results of these research projects will have a greater scientific value, leading up to publications in the mainstream medical literature.

Kinds of osteopathic research

It is obvious that all kinds of research are important and that no field of research can be put above another one. CORPP persues the development, the elaboration and the guidance of the following kinds of scientific research :

Basic Research in osteopathic medecine.
Clinical research in osteopathic medecine.
Research on the philosophical aspects in osteopathic medecine.
Socio-economical research in osteopathic medecine.

Hereafter we give a provisional, not-limited list of kinds of research:

Basic Research

Research in osteopathic teaching techniques.
Research in methodology for osteopathic scientific research.
Research in inter- and intraexaminer reliability studies.
Research in fundamental sciences.
Research in osteopathic diagnosis.

Clinical research

Research in outcomes studies on different modalities of osteopathic treatment techniques.
Research in outcomes studies of osteopathic medicine.
Research in osteopathic diagnosis.

Research on the Philosophical Aspects in Osteopathic Medicine

Socio-Economical Research

Research in cost-effectiveness of osteopathic medicine.
Sociocultural research.