after reading the thread on the josh ross injury,
who do people see.
me been a massage therapist and my partner a chiro, those are my preferences.
while i was running, i started off seeing a chiro from the age 16, had good results.
but when i got more into the aths scene it was all about physio and sports docs.
It was only my last 2 season that i got fed up with been injured all the time and been advises “well we can just stick a cortisone injection in”
so i started my chiro and massage regime again and was injury free going on 3 years now.
also Ive heard good and bad about osteo, and Ive heard similar things about needles near Achilles problems, about it flaring up after getting needle near or around it.
When I do actually go it is to a physio. The main reason is that under NZ’s ACC scheme physio’s fees are covered. I’m not so sure about the others.
The Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) administers New Zealand’s accident compensation scheme, which provides personal injury cover for all New Zealand citizens, residents and temporary visitors to New Zealand. In return people do not have the right to sue for personal injury, other than for exemplary damages.
For me, its not whether they are a Physio, Chiro etc, rather I have found a range of therapist that treat certain areas of the body better than others.
I have each for different things:
psoas/hip flexors
spine mobilisation
alignments
general flush
dry needles
accupuncture
Bowen
Gi Goong (?spelling)
Of course each can do similar to the others in some way but I suppose I gather much confidence by a particular therapist doing the things that I trully believe they do best at.
In essense I am my own best therapist and when I go I tell them what I believe I need to start off.
The best choice is someone that work on soft tissue and on spine, generally ART guys do both.
In alternative massage therapist (deep massage) and chiro.
A good physio can help with first stage of soft tissue injury (in Italy they can use any devices for rehab purposes), osteo is an alternative to chiro, but imo they have a low level approach to soft tissue.
Osteo is good specially for visceral or cranial/tmj problems.