Issue link: https://www.massageandbodyworkdigital.com/i/72312
pathology perspectives BY RUTH WERNER WHAT'S NEXT IS WHAT'S NOW This column is usually devoted to a specific pathological condition or concept that is connected to the overall theme of the current issue of Massage & Bodywork. In this edition, however, we will take a moment to look at what's next for massage in the context of pathology: a different direction altogether. I am a pathology wonk. I actually enjoy reading about diseases. I love the sense of how much medical writing I can understand, even when the jargon is highly technical and intimidating. (Here's a secret: it's not as hard as it looks.) More to the point, it is inspiring to learn about the amazing regenerative capacity of the human body and exciting to follow how our efforts can recruit and influence those innate healing energies. References to massage therapy in most technical journals and medical website periodicals are typically few and far between. But a headline in a recent edition of Medscape, a medical journal that collects and distributes material for several different specialties, read this way: "Effectiveness of Massage Therapy for Chronic, Non-malignant Pain: A Review," Jennie C.I. Tsao, Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 4, no. 2 (2007): 165–179.1 This was on the same page with titles that included, "A Review of Biologic Treatments for Psoriasis with Emphasis on Infliximab" and "Common Causes of Nausea and Vomiting and Treatment Reviewed" (both fascinating articles—if you're interested in that sort of thing). The article about massage and nonmalignant pain was a meta-analysis: the author compiled findings from multiple projects about massage to look for predictable trends. Her findings were mixed. Results showed that bodywork is a good option for pain relief in some situations and only so-so for others. The article further found that most of the studies were done with small sample sizes and warranted further investigation. In the best of all possible worlds, readers are now clamoring with more questions: what kinds of massage were investigated? Did massage therapists do the work or was it done by untrained clinicians? Were the studies blinded? How were participants selected? Was there a sham treatment for a comparison? Did the researchers who did the massage also collect the data? All these variables influence outcomes, and no individual study can be evaluated for accuracy and importance without answering these questions. This kind of meta-analysis is not unique. It reflects an enormous body of knowledge that is being generated right this minute about the effectiveness of massage therapy. What makes this article special is where it appeared: not in a trade magazine marketed primarily to people in this profession, nor in an obscure academic journal; it was a headline in an open forum targeted toward many types of healthcare providers. Research about massage creates a bridge to the rest of the healthcare community: it provides a language that we can all speak and understand together. And so we see that the discussion of massage in technical or research- based terms isn't what's next; it's what's now. Our profession is being studied and written about so that medical doctors of all disciplines, naturopaths, chiropractors, physical therapists, nurses, and others may be educated about what the evidence says regarding our work. massagetherapy.com—for you and your clients 119