- Email: [email protected]
Does Your Practice Measure Up?
12
journalistic sections to provide an interesting and enjoyable read. I hope that more of you will write for it.
Douglas-Wilson, I (1977). ‘Editorial review: Peerless pronouncements’, New England Journal of Medicine, 296, 877.
Regardless of piles, we will always be sitting uncomfortably on the horns of a dilemma: on one horn, we want the quality of Physiotherapy to be recognised by selection for Zndez Medicus; on the other horn, sometimes I think it does portray a much greyer and more solemn world than the one we and our patients live in and than is necessary to be considered seriously. Is it too detached clinically and academically? Does it ignore the tensions between undergraduate education and professional management, research and practice, politics and delivery of care, self-interest and the health of the nation? Does it reflect the uncertainties, the paradoxes and the dilemmas of contemporary clinical life? Should the content be more engaged politically? Should it be a better record of reactions to change and perceived threats to the NHS, health care and health professions in general, and physiotherapists and physiotherapy in particular? I ask because after 16 months in the job I tend to agree with O’Donnell(1990)that when you are editing a journal it is not a good idea, and could even be dangerous, to have too clear a notion of what you are trying to do. We have to give the profession and the readers what they want - and you, of course, have to write it.
Haynes, R B (1989). ‘Organising and accessing the literature’, Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 65, 10,673-686.
References Barrington, D (1770). ‘Account of a very remarkable young musician’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 60, 54-65. BBnichoux, R (1992). ‘Too many papers, really?’ Bulletin of the European Association of Scientific Editors, 47, 6-7.
Journal of British Podiatric Medicine (1992). ‘Across the editorial desk’, 47, 12, 241. Lancet (1992). ‘More brevity in The Lancet’,340, August 15, 519. Lock, S (1985). A Difficult Balance: Editorial peer review in medicine, The Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust, London. Lock, S (1989). ‘Publication: Duplicate, salami, meat extender all redundant’, British Medical Journal, 298, 1203-04.
Lock, S (1990). ‘One hand clapping’, British Medical Journal, 301, 677. McKie, D (1948). ‘The scientific periodical from 1665-1798: Philosophical Magazine, commemorative issue, 122-132, reprinted in, Meadows, A J (ed) (1979). The Scientific Journal, ASLIB Readers’ Series, vol 2, ASLIB, London. O’Connor, M (1978). Editing Scientific Books and Journals, Pitman Medical, London. O’Donnell, M (1990). ‘World Medicine: A sort of obituary’, British Medical Journal, 301, 760-768. Price, D J de Solla (1961). Science Since Babylon, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, Roberts, D (1992). ‘The journal literature of physiotherapy: Quality through peer review and access through Medline’, Physiotherapy, 78, 1, 29 - 33. Soffer, A (1992). ‘Can you believe what you read in medical journals?’ Chest, 101, 5, 1417-19. Schmutz, J K (1992). ‘Should single observations be published?’ Bulletin of the European Association of Scientific Editors, 47,243 Waldron, T (1990). ‘Is duplicate publishing on the increase?’ British Medical Journal, 304, 1029.
Boag, J W, Haybittle, J L, Fowler, J F and Emery, E W (1971). ‘The number of patients required in a clinical trial’, British Journal of Radiology, 44, 122-125.
Wooster, H (1970). ‘The future of scientific publishing - Or, what will scientists be doing for Brownie points?’ Journal of the Washington Academy of Science, 60, 41-45.
Doll, R and Peto, R (1980). ‘Randomised controlled trials and retrospective controls’, British Medical Journal, 280, 44.
Ziman, J M (1968). Public Knowledge: The Social Dimension of Science,Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Messachusetts.
torum We hope to offer you standards of good practice that will be well within the reach of the average physiotherapy service and easily understood by all staff. They will be grouped in terms of choosing a Janet 1M Simpson PhD MCSP test or measurement, using it to make a measurement, recording the outcome, and Lady Youde Lecturer in the Rehabilitation of Elderly People, Division of Geriatric interpreting and communicating the Medicine, St George‘s Hospital Medical School, London results. Other members of the group are Dr Oona Scott (University of East London), Sandra Holt (Newham Community Paediatric The CSP Quality Assurance Working joint flexibility, gait, cardiovascular and Physiotherapy Service), Jackie Nicholls Party (QAWP) is willing to help you respiratory function, ability t o perform (King’s College, London), Joy Conway answer this question - if you wish to pose functional activities, amount of pain (University of Southampton), dnd David it. It has invited me to chair a sub-group experienced, memory efficiency and and Hill (formerly at University of Ulster).We charged with producing a set of standards perceptual efficiency to list the most are supported by Jane Langley, Karen for tests and measurement in physio- obvious. Romain and Dr Catherine Sackley from therapy practice. In 1991 the American Physical Therapy the CSP staff, and Heather Coates As physiotherapists we have at our Association (APTA) published a compre- (QAWP). disposal a wide range of tests and hensive set of standards for tests and We plan to produce a draR set of standards measurements (Physical Therapy, 71, by Easter 1993, upon which we will be measurements with which to assess our patients’ current state and to check the 589-621), but I and the colleagues I have welcoming comments. If you and your efficacy of our management strategies. invited to join me in the work are taking staff would like to receive a copy of the a slightly different approach. Some a r e based on physiological draft for review, please send your name principles while others are rooted in The APTA standards are very detailed and address to Karen Romain a t CSP psychology. We assess muscle function, and may be regarded as ideal or optimal. headquarters.
Does Your Practice Measure Up?
Physlotherapy, January 1993, vol79, no 1
journalistic sections to provide an interesting and enjoyable read. I hope that more of you will write for it.
Douglas-Wilson, I (1977). ‘Editorial review: Peerless pronouncements’, New England Journal of Medicine, 296, 877.
Regardless of piles, we will always be sitting uncomfortably on the horns of a dilemma: on one horn, we want the quality of Physiotherapy to be recognised by selection for Zndez Medicus; on the other horn, sometimes I think it does portray a much greyer and more solemn world than the one we and our patients live in and than is necessary to be considered seriously. Is it too detached clinically and academically? Does it ignore the tensions between undergraduate education and professional management, research and practice, politics and delivery of care, self-interest and the health of the nation? Does it reflect the uncertainties, the paradoxes and the dilemmas of contemporary clinical life? Should the content be more engaged politically? Should it be a better record of reactions to change and perceived threats to the NHS, health care and health professions in general, and physiotherapists and physiotherapy in particular? I ask because after 16 months in the job I tend to agree with O’Donnell(1990)that when you are editing a journal it is not a good idea, and could even be dangerous, to have too clear a notion of what you are trying to do. We have to give the profession and the readers what they want - and you, of course, have to write it.
Haynes, R B (1989). ‘Organising and accessing the literature’, Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 65, 10,673-686.
References Barrington, D (1770). ‘Account of a very remarkable young musician’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 60, 54-65. BBnichoux, R (1992). ‘Too many papers, really?’ Bulletin of the European Association of Scientific Editors, 47, 6-7.
Journal of British Podiatric Medicine (1992). ‘Across the editorial desk’, 47, 12, 241. Lancet (1992). ‘More brevity in The Lancet’,340, August 15, 519. Lock, S (1985). A Difficult Balance: Editorial peer review in medicine, The Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust, London. Lock, S (1989). ‘Publication: Duplicate, salami, meat extender all redundant’, British Medical Journal, 298, 1203-04.
Lock, S (1990). ‘One hand clapping’, British Medical Journal, 301, 677. McKie, D (1948). ‘The scientific periodical from 1665-1798: Philosophical Magazine, commemorative issue, 122-132, reprinted in, Meadows, A J (ed) (1979). The Scientific Journal, ASLIB Readers’ Series, vol 2, ASLIB, London. O’Connor, M (1978). Editing Scientific Books and Journals, Pitman Medical, London. O’Donnell, M (1990). ‘World Medicine: A sort of obituary’, British Medical Journal, 301, 760-768. Price, D J de Solla (1961). Science Since Babylon, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, Roberts, D (1992). ‘The journal literature of physiotherapy: Quality through peer review and access through Medline’, Physiotherapy, 78, 1, 29 - 33. Soffer, A (1992). ‘Can you believe what you read in medical journals?’ Chest, 101, 5, 1417-19. Schmutz, J K (1992). ‘Should single observations be published?’ Bulletin of the European Association of Scientific Editors, 47,243 Waldron, T (1990). ‘Is duplicate publishing on the increase?’ British Medical Journal, 304, 1029.
Boag, J W, Haybittle, J L, Fowler, J F and Emery, E W (1971). ‘The number of patients required in a clinical trial’, British Journal of Radiology, 44, 122-125.
Wooster, H (1970). ‘The future of scientific publishing - Or, what will scientists be doing for Brownie points?’ Journal of the Washington Academy of Science, 60, 41-45.
Doll, R and Peto, R (1980). ‘Randomised controlled trials and retrospective controls’, British Medical Journal, 280, 44.
Ziman, J M (1968). Public Knowledge: The Social Dimension of Science,Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Messachusetts.
torum We hope to offer you standards of good practice that will be well within the reach of the average physiotherapy service and easily understood by all staff. They will be grouped in terms of choosing a Janet 1M Simpson PhD MCSP test or measurement, using it to make a measurement, recording the outcome, and Lady Youde Lecturer in the Rehabilitation of Elderly People, Division of Geriatric interpreting and communicating the Medicine, St George‘s Hospital Medical School, London results. Other members of the group are Dr Oona Scott (University of East London), Sandra Holt (Newham Community Paediatric The CSP Quality Assurance Working joint flexibility, gait, cardiovascular and Physiotherapy Service), Jackie Nicholls Party (QAWP) is willing to help you respiratory function, ability t o perform (King’s College, London), Joy Conway answer this question - if you wish to pose functional activities, amount of pain (University of Southampton), dnd David it. It has invited me to chair a sub-group experienced, memory efficiency and and Hill (formerly at University of Ulster).We charged with producing a set of standards perceptual efficiency to list the most are supported by Jane Langley, Karen for tests and measurement in physio- obvious. Romain and Dr Catherine Sackley from therapy practice. In 1991 the American Physical Therapy the CSP staff, and Heather Coates As physiotherapists we have at our Association (APTA) published a compre- (QAWP). disposal a wide range of tests and hensive set of standards for tests and We plan to produce a draR set of standards measurements (Physical Therapy, 71, by Easter 1993, upon which we will be measurements with which to assess our patients’ current state and to check the 589-621), but I and the colleagues I have welcoming comments. If you and your efficacy of our management strategies. invited to join me in the work are taking staff would like to receive a copy of the a slightly different approach. Some a r e based on physiological draft for review, please send your name principles while others are rooted in The APTA standards are very detailed and address to Karen Romain a t CSP psychology. We assess muscle function, and may be regarded as ideal or optimal. headquarters.
Does Your Practice Measure Up?
Physlotherapy, January 1993, vol79, no 1