Search

Purpose: This study arose from a praxial problem: how best to communicate with patients about the mechanism of cranial osteopathy. The problem was explored in a way that presented cranial osteopathy as a complex, multi-faceted phenomenon in the domain of healthcare practice. The resulting research question was phenomenologically inflected and was articulated as 'What sense do osteopaths and their patients make of the phenomenon of cranial osteopathy?' The concept of 'sense-making' was applied to both the manner in which osteopaths and their patients experience and understand cranial osteopathy and also the meaning that emerges in the course of giving or receiving cranial osteopathic treatment. Method: Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was used to explore cranial osteopaths' understanding and lived experience of their practice and to simultaneously explore patients' understanding and lived experience of cranial osteopathy. Four cranial osteopaths who were Fellows of the Sutherland Cranial College of Osteopathy participated, as did a patient each of theirs. The cranial osteopath participants were experienced practitioners and the patient participants were people who had had positive experiences of cranial osteopathy. The participants were interviewed about their lived experience and understanding of the phenomenon of cranial osteopathy. The semi-structured interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed by the researcher. The researcher kept a reflexive diary and an account of her theoretical fore-structure, in order to understand and audit the influences on her hermeneutic analysis of the data. From the data analysis, ongoing reflexion on praxis and a reading of the theoretical literature emerged three Super-Ordinate Themes and a hermeneutic model of cranial osteopathy. Findings: The IPA revealed that both patients and practitioners establish epistemological grounds for their sense-making about their embodied experience of cranial osteopathy (Super-Ordinate Theme 1: Making sense of sense-making), that they use embodied metaphor and linguistic meta-metaphor to understand their lived experience of cranial osteopathy (Super-Ordinate Theme 2: Metaphors for mechanisms), and that the mechanism of cranial osteopathy is considered by both patients and practitioners to arise from the therapeutic relationship (Super-Ordinate Theme 3: The meaningful osteopathic relationship). Conclusions: The main outcome of the study is a hermeneutic model of cranial osteopathy, which posits that the shared, embodied therapeutic relationship facilitates a collaborative rapport which enables the osteopath and the patient to come to an understanding of the source of the patient's malady, and that furthermore this understanding supports the mobilisation of the physiological mechanisms of healing to 'unconceal' health. iv ongoing reflexion on praxis and a reading of the theoretical literature emerged three Super- Ordinate Themes and a hermeneutic model of cranial osteopathy. Findings: The IPA revealed that both patients and practitioners establish epistemological grounds for their sense-making about their embodied experience of cranial osteopathy (Super-Ordinate Theme 1: Making sense of sense-making), that they use embodied metaphor and linguistic meta-metaphor to understand their lived experience of cranial osteopathy (Super-Ordinate Theme 2: Metaphors for mechanisms), and that the mechanism of cranial osteopathy is considered by both patients and practitioners to arise from the therapeutic relationship (Super-Ordinate Theme 3: The meaningful osteopathic relationship). Conclusions: The main outcome of the study is a hermeneutic model of cranial osteopathy, which posits that the shared, embodied therapeutic relationship facilitates a collaborative rapport which enables the osteopath and the patient to come to an understanding of the source of the patient's malady, and that furthermore this understanding supports the mobilisation of the physiological mechanisms of healing to 'unconceal' health.