IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socres/v6y2001i1p62-74.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Physiotherapists and Evidence Based Practice: An Opportunity or Threat to the Profession?

Author

Listed:
  • Rose Wiles
  • Sue Barnard

Abstract

The profession of physiotherapy in the UK is undergoing a period of change. Prominent among these aspects of change is the movement to evidence based practice (EBP). EBP is a central element of policy in the National Health Service (NHS). It is being implemented in physiotherapy as a means of securing contracts with purchasers but also as a means of contesting challenges from alternative practitioners and health professionals to the areas of work that physiotherapists view as their territory. Using data collected from a qualitative study of 56 physiotherapists of different grades working in different sectors of the NHS, this paper explores physiotherapists’ views of EBP and the impact that they expect it to have on professional boundaries and on the status and practice of physiotherapy. The study indicated that physiotherapists’ views may differ according to their position in the profession. Senior physiotherapists appeared to view the development of EBP as a threat to the profession which would decrease professional autonomy and the status of the profession. In contrast, junior and superintendent physiotherapists appeared to view EBP as an opportunity for strengthening the profession. The impact EBP will have on the profession of physiotherapy and its relationships with a range of health professionals is as yet unknown as are the responses that physiotherapists are likely to have to this development. This study identifies the areas in which conflicts are likely to be played out. A focus for future research analysing the impact of EBP is suggested.

Suggested Citation

  • Rose Wiles & Sue Barnard, 2001. "Physiotherapists and Evidence Based Practice: An Opportunity or Threat to the Profession?," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 6(1), pages 62-74, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:6:y:2001:i:1:p:62-74
    DOI: 10.5153/sro.575
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5153/sro.575
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5153/sro.575?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:6:y:2001:i:1:p:62-74. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.