The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

How patients choose osteopaths: a mixed methods study

Bishop, Felicity L., Bradbury, K.J., Hj Jeludin, Nur Nadiah, Massey, Y. and Lewith, George T. (2013) How patients choose osteopaths: a mixed methods study Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 21, pp. 50-57.

Record type: Article

Abstract

Objectives: To explore how patients choose individual osteopaths to consult; to test whether patients’ preferences for osteopaths depend on gender, the osteopath’s qualifications, and the cost of treatment; to explore patients’ perspectives.

Design. An explanatory mixed methods design incorporating a quasi-experimental study administered by postal survey and a qualitative interview study.

Setting. One sample of patients at a private-sector complementary therapy clinic in the UK completed a survey; a second sample of patients recruited from osteopathy clinics took part in qualitative interviews.

Main Outcome Measures. In the survey, male and female respondents (n=176) rated the likelihood of consulting each of 8 fictional osteopaths, representing all possible combinations of 3 factors (practitioner gender, biomedically qualified or not, working in a public sector or private clinic). Semi-structured qualitative interviews (n=19) about patients’ experiences of osteopathy were analysed deductively and inductively.

Results. Survey respondents preferred osteopaths who were also biomedical doctors, F(1,174) = 67.21, p<.001, ?2 = 0.28. Qualitative data showed that, when choosing an osteopath, patients valued personal recommendations from a trusted source and such recommendations overrode other considerations. First impressions were important and were based on patients’ perceptions of an osteopath’s competence, interpersonal fit, and immediate treatment effect.

Conclusions. Word of mouth appears to be the primary mechanism by which patients choose individual osteopaths; in the absence of personal recommendations, some patients prefer biomedically qualified practitioners. Trustworthy and appropriate information about practitioners (e.g. from professional regulatory bodies) could empower patients to make confident choices when seeking individual complementary practitioners to consult.

Full text not available from this repository.

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 22 October 2012
Published date: February 2013
Organisations: Primary Care & Population Sciences

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 344388
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/344388
ISSN: 0965-2299
PURE UUID: ea8815c9-085b-4050-b6f7-5786314d3c96
ORCID for Felicity L. Bishop: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-8737-6662
ORCID for K.J. Bradbury: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-5513-7571

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 22 Oct 2012 14:06
Last modified: 18 Jul 2017 05:16

Export record

Contributors

Author: K.J. Bradbury ORCID iD
Author: Nur Nadiah Hj Jeludin
Author: Y. Massey
Author: George T. Lewith

University divisions

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×