We all know screenings are a very effective way to gain new patients, and using the MyoVision software makes it that much easier. Here are some tips and tricks to get the most out of your screenings:
9. Use the QuickScreen procedure at screenings. This performs a test of the cervical and lumbar spine. Simply roll up the patient’s shirt and use a hair clip to clip the shirt in place, leaving enough room to measure the lumbar spine. Use a second hair clip if necessary to clip long hair.
10. Always perform the test standing. Psychologically, people consider it a commitment when they are required to sit and feel trapped, as when a salesperson at a car dealership asks you to be seated when discussing the purchase of a vehicle. People feel much more comfortable when they can walk up, be tested, and walk away.
11. Given a choice, use the sEMG instead of the thermograph for a screening. It's much easier to understand. The layperson quickly locks into the concept of muscle tension and how it relates to their spines. Correlating temperature to a spine is a larger leap and likely will result in more explanation on your part. Additionally, the thermograph is a temperature-reading instrument, the results of which may not be accurate in an uncontrolled environment.
ScanVision sEMG users: there are cost saving alternatives to batteries.
Are you spending hundreds of dollars replacing the batteries in your ScanVision? Well, what if we told you that you don't have to? We have 2 cost saving alternatives for you to consider:
NEW! Kevlar Lead Wires: more accurate readings + longer cords allows the DynaVision to stay at waist!
By John Maltby, DC
No matter what you think of BJ Palmer, he seems to have been on to something. In 1938, the public’s view of Chiropractic was at an all-time high. Now, with the most recent Gallup Poll numbers, it appears that we have hit an unprecedented low. The truth about the 2016 Gallup Poll, those touting it’s value are hiding is shown clearly in the infographic below. So what is it BJ knew in 1938 which we may learn from today?
Written by John Maltby, DC and David Marcarian, MA
In a recent webinar and blog post, a well-respected individual in injury evaluation, highly recommended replacing Range of Motion Assessment as an outcomes measure with subjective-objective evaluations (e.g. Oswestry). Apparently, he has not seen the latest edition of the AMA’s book “The Practical Guide to Range of Motion Assessment,” where the DynaROM is presented as the new gold standard. This device is not only one of the most important technological breakthroughs in 30 years but significantly improves the validity of range of motion measures. To suggest in this evidence-based world that we opt for subjective report over objective data, as this author did, is a poor decision considering the increasing demand by insurers, courts and the public for healthcare providers to support their clinical decisions with objective data. John Gerhardt, MD, the inventor of modern range of motion technology, determined that range of motion, when augmented by simultaneous measurement of muscle guarding, significantly increased the sensitivity and specificity of range of motion measures. Clinically, he found 70% of his patients with muscle guarding and pain demonstrated normal range of motion values. The DynaROM quickly and easily presents muscle guarding in an objective, quantitative manner and the process is familiar as it’s simply performing range of motion measures with ECG electrodes attached to measure the muscle guarding component.
By Jeri Anderson, DC and John Maltby, DC
Can you imagine a world where IME’s and insurers no longer control patient care? With US Patent 9,808,172 B2, there’s no need to imagine. The newly patented DynaROM Motion EMG is the Gold Standard per the AMA Medical Text on Range of Motion Assessment and has been named “the lie detector for back pain” by prestigious attorneys for its ability to detect the presence or absence of soft tissue injury.
The DynaROM technology is actually quite simple; it combines wireless dual inclinometry with EKG technology to simultaneously measure range of motion and muscle guarding. It’s commonly known that muscle guarding is the body's natural defense in response to pain in motion; so, when you measure these two together, the results become significantly more sensitive to soft tissue injury and symptom magnification. This is because a significant percentage of the population has normal range of motion yet show muscle guarding and pain. A fitting example is the yoga instructor involved in a rear end MVA: they had excellent range of motion prior to the MVA and won’t be considered abnormal post MVA. When the muscle guarding component is measured alongside ROM, their normal ROM now becomes an abnormal DynaROM, as their muscle guarding is exposed, and injury is clear.
Is it Ethical to Utilize the MyoVision for Public Screenings to Determine Potential Spinal Disorders?
By David Marcarian, MA
You can't argue with success. B.J. Palmer promoted the NCM throughout the profession and DCs were becoming very well known, to a large degree because of technology. According to former President of the International Chiropractic Association, John Maltby, DC, "If B.J. were alive, he would be using the MyoVision on every patient." John is not wrong. Visit the clinic at Palmer College and the first thing you'll see are devices, like the Electroencephalo-neuromentimpograph. He knew the power of objective data even in 1924!
There were those that did not like "how" it was presented, but all recognized conceptually, that it worked. It was significantly better than palpatory findings alone.
So what does this all have to do with the Gallup Poll? B.J. was ahead of his time: He listened. He heard that science was trumping belief systems and we needed to "tech up."
It is my opinion that one of the main reasons we have not broken through the 5% ceiling and the reason the public perceives us as less credible than medical doctors, is that we don't provide objective data. Many of us don't even understand what it is! When I asked a group of students what objective data they gather on patients, they said "Oswestry." Oswestry is fine, but doesn't the patient input influence the results? In other words, if you have a heart issue, does the cardiologist rely on your subjective report to determine if you have a problem? Of course not. They do an EKG.
Even your auto mechanic understands the importance of objective data. Do you question the need for service when they show your wheels are out of alignment on a computer screen?
When I took my car to my auto alignment specialist, you can imagine my surprise when I heard him speaking chiropractic lingo when it came to my car! But I learned something very important: When I saw my car's "health" on a computer screen, I didn't question whether or not I would "engage" in care for my car. I just said, "fix it." Considering he was the one to use scientific tools to determine the problem, I instantly recognized him as the expert with the right skills and credibility needed to fix it.
Do you see how this applies to us in Chiropractic?
Surface EMG 2.0: Paraspinal Scanning sEMG now is reproducible, has solid control group research studies, and is "the EKG For Spinal Health."
Not sure? Listen to a prospective patient's unscripted response.
At this screening, 8/10 individuals had never been adjusted. After correctly identifying issues via the E-Scan system, all 8 were adjusted for their first time.
And for those who want to really help patients? DynaROM Motion sEMG is making DCs the first choice of PI Attorneys.
In the days before DynaROM, attorneys preferred working with MDs over DCs specifically because of the results of the above Gallup Poll. Now, with the evidence-based model ruling the courtroom as well, the doctor with the best data wins. DynaROM Motion sEMG can prove injury and pain with Normal ROM, normal MRI and when every other measure fails.
You're the experts on Soft Tissue Injury. You are a natural at not only diagnosis, but treatment as well. All you have to do is to prove it. DynaROM Motion sEMG provides the proof.
- It is dirty. There are SO many games which need to be played.
- Attorneys will never refer to us anyhow.
- Who wants to deal with the stress of being deposed?
- The income from PI is so much greater, that I would not know what to do with the added income!
- It is a violation of my philosophical orientation, as I want only patients who want to see me for wellness.
Time for a wake up call!
Why is PI perceived as a "dirty game"? Because it has always required we do things which we know are unethical for the purpose of obtaining patients. Some pay for a list of DMV accident records. Some spend time and money taking attorneys to dinner. There are all kinds of "tricks". The best trick of all, is to have tools which prove your value to attorneys. This way you don't have to chase them down, but they chase you down.
Change the game from opinion vs opinion to data vs. opinion.
Attorneys tell me all the time, that they prefer to work with MD's over DCs. I started to ask. "Clearly the public perception is that the MD has more credibility over the DC" is what I heard. Is this the case for the DC armed with objective data? Not at all. As a matter of fact, doctors that used to fear being before a jury or even in a deposition now gladly accept such challenges, as they have their trusty DynaROM Data to protect them and their patients.
Focus on the data, and opinion means nothing. Literally.
Designer of the MyoVision and experienced expert witness.