opinions of active release therapyPosted by lauriel on 6/25/04 at 13:47 (153923)
I am thinking of having this done for my PF and I have to drive 2 2/12 for treatment so I wnated to get thoughts on this.
I was also just readng Elyses post ont eh gaston method, how do they differ?
Re: opinions of active release therapyAlliW on 6/25/04 at 14:04 (153924)
I saw an excellent chiropractor in San Francisco who performed ART on my feet. When I began, I couldn't walk much due to the severity of the pain. When I left (moved to Paris), I was a thousand times better, functional (back to running and playing soccer), but not completely pain free. I would have continued if I had not moved. Also, I have compounding issues due to an ACL reconstruction, so I have various things to work on. I hope to find something similar in Paris.
I would definitely recommend trying it. I knew after the first visit that this would help me. Good luck.
p.s. i don't know about graston, but i'm interested having read the previous posts
Re: opinions of active release therapyJohn from MN on 6/25/04 at 14:13 (153926)
ART is ok but Taws stretching is far superior (www.softtissuerelease.com). Taws stretching can accomplish more in 15 minutes than 3 weeks of ART. I found ART painful.
Re: opinions of active release therapyElyse B on 6/25/04 at 15:30 (153930)
I posted a while ago on this. I prefer graston, most practitioners prefer graston or soft tissue massage because ART plays havoc on their hands. I think graston is far superior and I have done both. You can go to http://www.grastontechnique.com to read up on it.
Active Release Techniques and The Graston Technique:
Do we have to choose?
Dale J. Buchberger, DC
Doctors, chiropractic students, academic colleagues, athletic trainers and physical therapists ask me everyday, 'what do you think of Graston?' or 'what do you think of Active Release Techniques®?' Which one should I learn first or at all?
First of all it is important to understand my activity and involvement with each technique before you can judge as to my objectivity in writing this article. I believe that my experience with each technique is what allows me to maintain an objective view on each technique. My scientific and academic background also lend to objectivity. Despite my best efforts I am sure that proponents from either camp will find criticisms with my views. But it is the debate that makes life interesting.
I have been involved with practicing Active Release Techniques since 1992. I was amongst the first group assembled in Bensalem, Pennsylvania at a CCSP seminar when Dr. P. Michael Leahy demonstrated (on me) what has become known as Active Release Techniques or ART. Since that time I have been utilizing Active Release Techniques. I have been an instructor for Active Release Techniques since 1998 and have published several articles discussing Active Release Techniques. My involvement with Graston began approximately two years ago. I am now a treating investigator on a research project involving the use of GISTM (Graston) for repetitive strain disorders of the hand and wrist. For the last year or so I have been using both ART and GISTM in my practice and have discussed both techniques with patients, colleagues and students.
The following is my explanation of both techniques, usage in private practice, as well as practicality in the chiropractic profession. I believe this is a rationale unbiased explanation of both techniques. From there you have to make your own choices; ART, Graston or both?
Active Release Techniques
Developed by P. Michael Leahy, DC.
Active Release Techniques Soft tissue management system® is a manual soft tissue technique using the examiners hands to apply the technique. The main concept is to reestablish motion between fascial planes thus reducing fibrous adhesions and reestablishing neural and myofascial glide between tissues. The technique utilizes patient active motion when ever possible. A tension contact is used as opposed to compressive contacts used in other soft tissue techniques. The primary direction is to go with venous drainage during an ART treatment although reverse directions are occasionally used with appropriate modification. I currently use ART on 100% of my patients. My practice is specifically referral from patients, medical practitioners, physical therapists and chiropractors. The technique is applied to acute, chronic, overuse; repetitive strain injuries and NMS post operative cases of all types. The number of postoperative cases is growing constantly. The technique is dynamic, it only requires you to use your hands and contrary to popular belief a lubricant is not necessary when the technique is applied correctly.
One rap on ART is that it is tough on your hands. This is true in two cases: 1) Every patient you treat is built like Arnold Schwarzenegger. And at that this would be if you were working on them from the hip to the knee exclusively 2) You are applying the technique incorrectly. This is the most common cause of sore hands and thumbs with ART use. Harder is not better! Using ART is actually a case of less is more!
The other big rap is that the technique is too expensive to learn and that Dr. Leahy is entrepreneurial. 1) I would agree that Dr. Leahy is entrepreneurial. But the last time I checked this was the United States of America and that was legal. As a health care practitioner, if you open a private practice you are an entrepreneur as well. So if that's your beef get over it. 2) No other technique gives you an instructional ratio of 5-8 students per instructor; i.e. you get what you pay for. 3) No other technique provides the hours of hands on instruction, instructional manual, video tapes, protocol updates and puts patients in your office. 4) If you are not using what you have learned in an ART seminar on Monday morning then it was too expensive (then you should put the tapes and manual next to the stationary bicycle in your basement). 5) The protection of the technique is for consumer protection not Dr. Leahy's. If the technique were not right protected it would be watered down like every other technique and would be essentially useless to the consumer. As it is there are folks in health care claiming to do ART and quite frankly they don't have a clue. You have instructors at chiropractic colleges who have never taken a course but claim to teach ART. In addition to opening their institution up to a copyright infringement lawsuit they are also doing their students a disservice by falsely representing themselves as something they are not. When I refer a patient to an ART practitioner I am confident that they are receiving ART as I perform it and not some bastardized version of something that was passed down from someone who read an article on it and was never trained. As chiropractors we get upset when a non-chiropractor learns to manipulate from some minimal training. ART falls into this category. If anything, Dr. Leahy should be applauded for not only raising the bar educationally but attempting to improve professional integrity in a profession that continues to shoot itself in the foot by washing it's dirty laundry in public and looking for the 'cheap' way out (more on this socioeconomic phenomenon later).
The Graston Technique (GISTM)
Developed by David Graston who suffered a multiple ligament injury of his knee in an accident in 1987. The surgical reconstruction left him with limited range of motion. Having failed traditional physical therapy or orthopedic management he began using cross friction massage as described by Cyriax. The extensive manual work caused fatigue in his hands and he subsequently developed stainless steal tools to assist in the application of myofascial work on scar tissue. The Graston Instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization technique is a soft tissue technique designed to mobilize, reduce and reorganize fibrotic restrictions in the neuromusculoskeletal system. The technique is delivered through the use of six (6) hand held stainless steel instruments. A specially designed lubricant must be applied to the skin prior to utilizing the instrument. The lubricant allows the instrument to glide over the skin without causing irritation. The special lubricant also allows the instrument to glide without causing an accumulation of the lubricant on the instrument as commonly happens with ultrasound gel on an ultrasound head.
The treatment is applied in multiple directions: with venous drainage, against venous drainage and cross fiber in multiple directions to the lesion. As with other soft tissue techniques the treatment application is also part of the diagnostic process. As the Graston tools are applied a 'vibratory' sensation is felt through the tool to the examiners fingertips. The patient simultaneously experiences a similar sensation while the tool traverses the area being treated. I currently use The Graston technique on approximately 30% of my patients. I have found the technique to be very useful on 1) very chronic cases, frozen shoulder, de Quervains, etc. 2) Cases where ART, proper rehabilitation and other traditional forms of treatment have been ineffective.
When using the Graston instruments the examiner must be careful to keep the tools clean and use appropriate grips. As the tools become slippery the examiner has a tendency to grip harder. This in itself can cause repetitive strain injuries to the examiner. Again keeping the tools clean will help avoid treatment-induced injury to the examiner.
Although the Graston workshops are not as pricey as the ART workshops the tools do carry a heavy price tag. Graston does provide you with an instructional manual. It is my understanding that they are also working on a provider network similar to ART. Instructional video tapes are not available for the Graston technique.
Unlike ART, Graston does not have an individual that the health care professions can complain to regarding cost of the tools and workshop. Therapy Care Resources (TCR) of Indianapolis, Indiana is the owner/manager of the Graston Technique. If there were an individual versus a company this may change public voice regarding cost of the instruments as is the case with ART.
Read response from Graston
Application of Both Techniques
While using both techniques I have found that the Graston technique compliments ART very well and vice versa. Something that is not talked about very much is the necessity of the patient to undergo an exercise routine consisting of strengthening and flexibility exercises specific to their condition. Either technique falls short of it's maximal effectiveness if the patient does not comply with a balanced program of strengthening and flexibility training. I believe that the effectiveness of either technique is limited by: 1) The starting product. Is the patient de-conditioned and lacking sufficient muscular volume to apply the technique to? Are we applying the technique to tissue that has undergone fatty degeneration? How will this affect the duration and outcome of the treatment? 2) How long have they had the problem? 3) Once treated, will they go back and perform the injury inducing task again?
Graston is a good precursor to ART when the patient presents with diffuse fibrous restrictions that for practical time and financial restraints are better treated with Graston initially. The examiner must realize that the goal of Graston is to create an inflammatory response and allow remodeling to take over from this point. This is contrary to ART, which attempts to establish motion without inducing a dramatic inflammatory response. Once the restrictions reduce and become more isolated, introducing ART into the treatment plan at this point has been a very effective scenario.
Practicality in the Chiropractic Profession
Both techniques will positively impact and compliment private chiropractic practice. Manual soft tissue techniques address an aspect of manual therapy practice (chiropractic) that joint manipulation cannot address. Adding soft tissue manipulative techniques to your practice will only improve your outcomes and expand the areas of the body and number of conditions you can treat rationally and effectively.
This being said, Active Release Techniques is probably the more practical technique to introduce into chiropractic practice. It can be applied readily without the need of extra equipment. When properly trained the practitioner can treat a given region or condition in a reasonable office visit and compliment Chiropractic Manipulative Therapies (CMT's) immediately. Along the lines of reimbursement ART has begun the 'ART Elite Provider Network' (ART EPN). This is a PPO based on improved care with appropriate reimbursement for the service provided versus watered down care with ridiculously low reimbursement. In other words better treatment equals better outcomes and should receive better reimbursement. This is a great idea and hopefully it will flourish. The ART EPN is new and data is not available at this time.
Graston, while it is a valuable adjunctive therapy to chiropractic practice can be less practical in areas of the U.S. where chiropractic reimbursement is limited to CMT or global fees. To repeat what I have stated earlier in this article, Graston is extremely affective in stubborn cases. These are the cases however where the majority of patient's will pay almost anything to get better. This reduces the reimbursement issue. Graston does add significant time to the office visit, especially if you follow the Graston protocol to the letter. If you alter the protocol to fit an increased number of patients into the office secondary to lower or no reimbursement then the effectiveness of the technique may suffer.
In My Opinion
Both ART® and Graston® techniques are invaluable adjunctive therapies for the practicing chiropractor. Both techniques provide an avenue with which to address the soft tissue component of the injury and treatment equation. Although chiropractors by their training have good manual skills when it comes to joint manipulation the DC education falls grossly short when it comes to soft tissue applications and skill. Since the chiropractic institutions are too busy arguing over who is going to control the political and financial arena of 'soft tissue' treatments or 'proprietary techniques' the student's pay the price of educational censorship. In fact students just want the information to give them a competitive edge in the market. The world is changing and it includes soft tissue management working in conjunction with joint manipulation and rehabilitative exercise programs. Chiropractic institutions need to recognize this or the physical therapy and athletic training professions will leave them behind.
My recommendation is to learn ART first for the following reasons:
1) You get reacquainted with the anatomy we long forgot.
2) You get reacquainted with your hands and tactile sense.
3) It's dynamic. Wherever you are, you have your tools.
4) It is a system of diagnosis and treatment.
5) Continuing education in biomechanical education and application is available.
6) You actually get patients referred to you.
7) The athletic and occupational world knows what ART can do for them.
8) It makes sense.
9) You spent between 60-120K on your chiropractic education (depending when you graduated), the 5-8K you spend on ART won't kill you.
10) You can still be the first on your block to know something new and chiropractic students can enroll in ART workshops while in school for a significant discount.
Then learn Graston (for students-you cannot take Graston until you graduate so this is an additional reason to take ART first). Graston gives you that added bullet in your arsenal to get those difficult cases better. When you combine ART, Graston, manipulation and rehabilitation you are the most complete NMS treatment machine.
The bottom line is you should consider learning both techniques. You and your patients will be better for it.
Re: opinions of active release therapylauriel on 6/25/04 at 18:19 (153936)
thanks for the input, Elyse, very good article, been looking formore info on these thechniqes. I have a person in my building who does the St johns method of neuromuscular therapy. basicly trigger point therapy to induce pain and break the pain cycle and tissue, very similar to both ART and Graston.
I thin I may give her a try first befoe I drive 2 hours for treatment.
Re: opinions of active release therapylauriel on 6/25/04 at 18:29 (153937)
Oh I was thinking of doing accupuncture, has any tried it with good results? I found some info on the net hat said it was a good treatment
Re: opinions of active release therapyEd Davis, DPM on 6/25/04 at 18:38 (153939)
I note that the aforementioned techniques appear to be patented/copywrited (unsure of this). My first question is 1)Are they sufficiently unique to warrant copywrite protection? If one looks at the large numbers of known massage techniques I have difficulty in seeing 'uniqueness.' Second: 2)Schools are an appropriate venue for teaching healing techniques so to what extent are such techniques incorporated into the curriculums of the schools -- chiropractic colleges, massage threapy schools?
I agree wholeheartedly that treatment of PF is multifactorial. I have used the concept of the 'treatment triad' to explain the divisions of treatments. Inflammmation is the predominant component early in the course of PF. If inflammation is maintained, it is often via occupational considerations, improper shoegear, biomechanical deficits which are respectively addressed with occupational modification, shoegear changes and orthotics. Finally, PF that persists becomes a tissue qualiiy issue. That would be addressed with ESWT and/or perhaps with a deep tissue massage technique.
Re: opinions of active release therapyPlace on 6/26/04 at 10:20 (153979)
I have had accupuncture, ART and Graston. I do prefer the Graston over ART, that is if I was getting the same standard ART treatment (so many variations). Any massage always made my feet and legs feel great for that day but never had any perminant results. Perhaps I needed to go three times a week to feel the effects (i went once or twice a week). Accupuncture was strange, it did have some effect but what spacifically it was, I am not sure. Maybe just inceased blood flow to the area.
Re: opinions of active release therapyjohn h on 6/26/04 at 11:30 (153983)
Ed: In one of the articles I recently posted the author said an individula in many cases can apply the massage technique like fricton massage themselves. Since you are the one feeling the pain you are in a position to more adequately judge how much to press or not press. Massaging the feet is really easy to do when laying down and swinging one leg over the other. For the past 4 days I have been doing a cross friction massage as I understand it for about 15 minutes on each foot. I can feel all the little nodules, scar tissue or whatever and can zero in precisely where my pain is.probably better than a therapist. Like most of the instructions I have read I masssage to a level of being a little uncomfortable but not to create pain. This seems somewhat effective after about 4 days but as the author noted if it took you 10 years to get the way you are do not expect to be cured in days or even months. I am using our old friend Wheat Grass Creame to do the massage with. Where I have the will to continue each day is yet to be seen but I am making it a habit when I hit the sofa or bed to watch a ball game. It may not be as much fun as having a massage babe but it sure is less expensive.
Re: opinions of active release therapyjohn h on 6/26/04 at 11:32 (153984)
I continue to be amazed at the number of names showing up for massage techniques. There is just a limited number of things you can do with a massage and a rose by any other name smells the same.
Re: opinions of active release therapyEd Davis, DPM on 6/26/04 at 13:06 (153989)
Good point. The claim of uniqueness among some of the promoters of the techniques, commercialism and somewhat vagueness of presentation makes me wonder. There have been some good explainations of what is trying to be accomplished with the techniques but not a clear differentiation between techniques and how such 'variations on a theme' lead to different effects.
Re: opinions of active release therapyMarty from SLC on 6/28/04 at 12:48 (154084)
Did you not have PF and TTS release done? Is the foot not healed up? IF not are you of the opinion that the surgery didn't help?
Re: opinions of active release therapylauriel on 6/28/04 at 16:06 (154094)
I am trying this, it feels like gristle in my arch. I did find an area that the was of almost a pinhead, very localized I didnt realize I had pain there but did massage it. its almost at the bottom on my incision from my TTS surgery. Dont know if they are related, my problem with massage is I have tendonitis real bad in my elbows whch make the pain in my hands killer trying to massage. I am going to check out masaage tools.
Re: opinions of active release therapyjohn h on 6/28/04 at 18:31 (154096)
I had TTS and PF surgery at the same time. No cure and no worse. Careful with boht of these surgeries as either can go very wrong and cannot be undone. Try 'everything' else first.
Re: opinions of active release therapyDorothy on 6/28/04 at 21:08 (154122)
John H. - Since I trust you and think you try to give clear directions, I will ask you: can you give a description of the cross-friction technique you are using?? Thanks.
Re: opinions of active release therapyDavid B on 6/29/04 at 16:29 (154168)
I highly recommend active release therapy, can I ask what state are you in? If missouri I would like to refer you my ART chiropractor. I am like you I drove 90 mins one way to have ART down twice a week. Im not 100% but I would say at least 75%. Instead of my heel hurting all day it just hurts a little but when I 1st wake up. Come fall I will probaly go back and see if I can get it taken care of but summer time is too busy for me. I had two ESWT treatments and neither one helped DONT DO THIS unless you don't mind throwing away $3500-$5000! Here is a link to the ART providers:
Re: opinions of active release therapylauriel on 6/30/04 at 12:28 (154252)
David, thanks, I live in Calif and I got his anme from that site. I have an appt on Monday and still on the fence. I think I have atypical pf since I dont have the waking symptoms, but dont know if that makes a difference. I am going a vacation early sept and dont want to make things worse which can sometimes happen in treatment.
From everything I have been reading here the last few days, I gave my feet a deep massage last night, they are sore but I found the bottom of my left foot to be almost fibrous like gristle in most of the bottom of the foot and my right just a little. wondering is this the scar tissue everyone talks about.
Re: opinions of active release therapyDavid B on 7/01/04 at 08:04 (154313)
Yes, that is probaly scar tissue, you can massage your foot yourself but if you want it to be fixed you will need a professional that specializes in ART. My doctor told me he would give me the 'works' since I have to drive so far if I could stand the pain. Yes, it hurts some when they get deep in and massage that scar tissue out, but one day I could barely walk into his office, I dealt with 20 mins of him massageing it, and when I left I was able to walk without much pain. Of course, it was a bit sore the next day. You should give your foot at least 24 hrs before having ART performed again. I went twice a week for 4 months sometimes only once at the last part but like I said I only have pain now for 20-30 mins when I first wake up, and it is not the crippling pain like I had before. For example, having to grab ahold of something to walk, walking like I was walking on egg shells etc. Try it, most insurance companies will pay for visits to the chiropractor if not I only paid $35 a visit.