I was wondering in anyone had any expierence with the Primal Reflex Release Technique or the course. I'm looking into CEU courses and one of my co-workers has a friend who says it is amazing. Just wondering if anyone knows of the technique, uses the technique, or has any expierence with the course. Looking for a little feedback. Thanks.
Pat, I saw the gentleman perform this technique on multiple participants at the private practice section meeting in Phoenix this year, he treated people who had complaints and convinced them that they were better. One was a friend of mine with long standing sinus issues and he attempted to utilize the rooting reflex to inhibit tone in some of his accessory breathing muscles, he then tried real hard to convince the crowd and my friend that he was better (in my opinion, based on what I saw) my friend did report some relief of symptoms, although very short term. He also was offended when I asked him some legitimate questions regarding nerve innervations and what he described as nerve "dumping grounds". For instance he told my friend that his sinus surgery had facilitated his trigeminal nerve and that the traps and ant/lateral neck were "a dumping ground" for the trigeminal nerve. I then asked him for his reference for this information, he became offended "your asking me how I know this!!?" I said yes, I would be interested in his reference for this information and he ignored me and turned back to the crowd. Needles to say I did not purchase his home study course. Just one man's experience. Rick
I have some secondary experience with PRRT, in fact my wife is qualified as an instructor in the basic course of PRRT, although work has kept her too busy to actually teach it. I can give you MY impressions, not hers, and I'll be as honest as I can with that obvious bias.
Whether or not a PRRT course is right for you depends a lot on how committed you feel to practicing strictly with EBM.
Negatives first: There is no good explanation given for why and how these techniques work. There is a general framework presented but there is no real attempt to tie that in to current research. There have been no outcome studies or any research done on these treatments. (I do know several PT's are organizing together to conduct these) and there is generally a lack of regard for the EBM model. There is also quite a bit of salesmanship regarding getting people to attend the course.
Positves: I have done a lot of looking through the research trying to figure it out and the concept of neuromodulation through these tapping techniques seems to be plausible and in fact, likely. I have not yet found research which would suggest that it isn't biologically plausible or likely. If you are comfortable with "I do it because it works" then I have seen a lot of patients leave with "WOW, I can't believe it doesn't hurt anymore", my wife doesn't sell the treatment or even mention what she is doing. Every therapist gets these, but with PRRT it has come a lot more common. It is easy to apply, painless for both therapist and patient and compliments other treatments.
In short, I think it is an effective tool, many people, have changed the way they practice after experience with it, that suffers from a lack of evidence, what I see as a regressive/defensive attitude towards evidence and EBM, lack of cohesive theory and what I believe may be a bit of overselling.
Joined: August 6, 2002
From: Milwaukee, WI
If a technique helps facilitate integrating exercise and functional rehabilitation to a patients program by decreasing pain I do not think I could have any objections. We know the evidence behind exercise and neuro-muscular re-ed and decreasing pain can often facilitate increased activity. Am I wrong in thinking this way??
Joined: January 31, 2005
I don't think you're wrong, Ryan.
I believe PRRT suffers from the same fate as many other treatments. Instead of just admitting that the techniques are neurofaciliatory in general and that the instructors honestly don't know exactly how they work, there is a resort to some grandiose marketing and explanation scheme. It is the explanation and marketing scheme which really turns EBP practitioners off. In my opinion.
Just think, the same process happened with manipulation (subluxation theory), craniosacral(feeling CSF and cranial bone movement), Myofascial Release (memories stored in fascia), etc etc.
Possibly useful tools which can fit in our box and make sense in terms of human physiology, get disregarded by critically thinking therapists because they are ridiculously packaged.
I place the blame for this squarely on those who are advertising, marketing, and teaching these techniques. They have a vested financial interest in making the technques seem more complicated and involved than they need to be. They do or at least SHOULD know better, and I feel no remorse when their program gets panned on Evidence in Motion or any other site where critically thinking people gather. I think the onus should be on these instructors/marketers, as members of a scientific profession, to align the marketing and explanation with current practice and human physiology as we know it. Or face more uncomfortable moments like what Rick described, and decreasing enrollment as more PT programs emphasize EBP.
Joined: October 22, 2002
Every new technology inventor faces the same dilema of: " Where is the evidence". e.g Dr. Barry Marshall, the inventor/promoter of H. Pylori bacteria which causes gastric ulcers. This bactria was discovered in 1979, however, it took Dr. Marshall to show the scientific world by drinking H.Pylori, geting gastirc infection/ulcer and finally curing the ulcer by taking strong antibiotics. In this case Glaxo made 30 billion dollars in Tagamet and Zantac so they had an incentive to not find a cure for Ulcers. We joke about John Barnes regarding his Myofascial release seminars which took 4 days with the information worth 45 minutes. But now insurance companies have recognised Myofascial Release and have a code for us to bill for and with higher reimbursement rates. PRRT, I think falls in this same category. Jason, I agree that teachers of new techniques need to be honest but that is not always the reality. People in the scientific community are not altruistic everybody needs money and fame..we are all humans.
goodlooks - you overlook that Barnes is not at the edge of "invention" with regards to new science - he is at the edge of invention. The explanation of the TECHNIQUE of MFR is readily available from research into skin-neurology, central processing and more. It is our duty as professionals to explore the MOST reasonable and sound explanation for techniques "that work" - and often one can find that Occam's razor works well in that. There is everything right with hands-on, but to market and invent outlandish explanations and then say - "the research has to catch up" with my brilliance - while all the time there are much better explanations for the effects - is just $$$ making. In the worst snake-oil kinda way. That's just me though...
Joined: March 29, 2003
Let me begin by saying, I know nothing of PRRT.
However, I did look at the site, and the "articles" seemed especially weak. Nothing published in professionally considered journals.
"Seminars"- also ambiguous. NO costs, CEs, etc. provided. That is important info------only an eMail contact. ?????
Just my gut------ This is not consistant with other seminar promotions. I would look into other ways to spend my time and money. I could be wrong. BUT----Just my opinion, ----which you probably never wanted in the first place!! And You know what they say about opinions!!!(just like A******'s-- everybody has one!!)------- Good luck!
I don't think Iam's meant to leave the price off on his website, I don't see where he has anything to gain from that, especially since it accompanies all his other marketing material. There are CE's available in some states, but not others, this depends on whether the instructor has paid for it or not. CE credits have nothing to do with quality control. The articles I would agree with you about.
Having thought about this quite a bit it seems apparent that EBM is good for weeding out modalities and treatments but it does little for innovation. How many innovative, different, treatment ideas come around in therapy? Not that many. They need to be subject to review, but in every case their seems to be a "critical mass" level of usage before this occurs. PRRT, Dorko's techniques, and other peoples haven't yet reached that level.
It would seem to me though that demonstrating his techniques, for a bunch of PT's, on a bunch of PT's, at a national conference is a form of "peer review". I think it would take more confidence in your technique to do this than to publish a paper on it. After all, while some suggest that it is just a matter of Iam's trying to convince people they felt better, he knows they are going to talk, and he knows that the results have to be convincing to get people to spend their cash to attend his course. Anyone was free to treat these same PT's using EBM protocols side-by-side to discredit his techniques. When SJ said she saw it and just turned away, this to me is an act of willful ignorance as plain as refusing to read a journal article that contradicts your own position. Evidence is not always found in a peer reviewed journal, a good place to start is personal experience.
Randy, I saw it, watched it, had it performed on a friend, asked questions that went unanswered, and left feeling like I had just seen the guy in The Outlaw Josey Wales, you know, the one selling the liquid good for everything from rheumatism to acne, then Josey spits tobacco juice on his jacket and says "how's it at stains" (classic by the way). And I disagree that doing these things at a private practice section conference takes more courage then publishing in a journal, kind of like selling shears to sheep shearers, now if he sets up a booth at the next AAOMPT meeeting I am sure he wouldn't last very long without answering some questions that should have pretty readily available answers.
I will admit that I am intrigued by people like your wife who seem to have had some success with the techniques, but like Jason I detest the way this guy markets his product.
I have no problem with what you say. You checked it out and didn't like what you saw. I, too, have some problems with the way it is presented and marketed. I've written to John Iam's expressing these concerns. My wife and I discussed this also, since her reputation will in some way be attached to PRRT. She decided that the results she has gotten, and the way it has changed the way she practices warrants continuation with it.
I'm also not suggesting that people need to personally experience every claim made by every person pushing a technique or treatment. There are too many and no real way to know which are worth pursuing. My comments were for those who dismiss this, or anything, when it is right before them and they don't even bother to investigate. If I receive a journal article, and toss it in the garbage because it doesn't appeal to me, this demonstrates nothing about the article, it only demonstrates something about me.
I saw his lecture and visited his booth at CSM in San Diego. I volunteered to be one of the people he performed the technique on. Ive had IT Band syndrome for a while, and they said they could treat that. He palpated my medial gastroc (nothing on the lateral side) before and after the "procedure" I did have pain in my medial gastroc upon palpation. My pain was definetely lessened afterwards, however, he palpated my gastroc totally differently the 2nd time. The first palpation he used the tips of his 2,3,4 digits while the final palpation was more of a palmar squeeze/pads of 2,3,4,5 digits. Needless to say, my knee still hurts. However, maybe its a placebo effect thing?
Randy you state "Having thought about this quite a bit it seems apparent that EBM is good for weeding out modalities and treatments but it does little for innovation." EBM is NOT limited to studies, RCTs and the like; EBM includes the proper interpretation of available knowledge and correlation of available science. So, while treating with "soft tissue" techniques has a universal appeal and good indications for effectiveness, the underpinnings are what makes one technique dramatically different from others.
And I would have walked away as well....After having been silly enough to go hogwild with CST, MFR, MET, and all the Canadian Ortho course... I go for anything with a sound and reasonable science, and will hesitate long when contemplating any course that requires very specific techniques.
I wanted to update this to say that my wife no longer has instructor status with PRRT. She and I both were to put off by the sales and marketing push, it is sort of like being in a bad Amway meeting. There are three courses, Basic, Intermediate, Advanced: prices are $1000, $2000, $3000 respectively. Each is a two day course. (This didn't come out of my pocket, no way!) It came to a head because my wife wasn't willing to pay to go to the Advanced course and agree to "further courses". She also objected to the embracing of quack practices that is encouraged.
She still uses the techniques and believes they work. Looking forward to the day this is either validated or not.
I won't bother getting into another EBM definition debate, like I said in another thread, it is like the term "agnostic", it isn't used the way it originally was, which was much more restrictive. After all, it represented a new paradigm in medical thinking, while what you describe is simply good, science-based medicine, hardly a new paradigm. Oops, I just said I wasn't going to debate it.
Let me begin by introducing myself. My name is Erick Iams and I am one of John Iams' 3 sons.
I realize it has been over 10 years since the last post on this thread but I was compelled to write an update as it seems some people are still reading this post.
I've been involved with (and witnessed the evolution of) PRRT for most of my life - I grew up around it! Then about 7 years ago I began working full time with dad as I saw this modality as a very valuable tool that had not been fully introduced to the manual therapy community.
In that time we've made many changes in our marketing strategy, seminar pricing and efforts to have PRRT be included in case studies. In my opinion, we've taken feedback similar to what is covered here and used it to grow as a company. We now have 16 PRRT instructors teaching seminars all over the US, Ireland, and Japan. We have 3 case studies published (will post links below) with hopefully more on the way.