Narrative ReviewFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2022

Developing fluency in a language of tactile communication.

Neil Tuttle, Susan Hillier

PMID 36712783

WHAT IT FOUND

This paper proposes a theoretical framework for viewing physiotherapy touch as a two-way conversation rather than a passive technique.

It offers no clinical data, trials, or outcomes, so it provides no evidence to support or refute any treatment effects.

What this paper is

This is a narrative review and theoretical commentary proposing a framework for tactile communication in physiotherapy. It discusses concepts like embodied enaction and shared intentionality, and offers suggestions for teaching students, but it reports no original data, methods, results, or clinical outcomes. There is no finding here to change your practice on.

What it does not show

The paper is a theoretical narrative and opinion piece, not an empirical study. It reports no data, patient outcomes, or validation of the proposed tactile communication models. Claims about the efficacy of touch as an active therapeutic tool are based on author perspective and biological rationale, not clinical trial results.

The easy way to misread this

Do not interpret the authors' theoretical arguments about touch as evidence that manual therapy produces specific clinical outcomes. The paper proposes a way to think about and teach touch, but it reports no data showing that this approach works.

Read it on PubMed →


The study

Certainty of evidence
Low

Browse

    Cite

    Neil Tuttle, Susan Hillier Developing fluency in a language of tactile communication. Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences. 2022.

    Read the original