Whats the difference between an Osteopath and a Chiropractor?

This is probably the commonest question I have to answer when ever I mention that my job is an osteopath. It's a tricky question to answer since I have never been to see a chiropractor either personally or professionally. The knowledge I have gathered about the subject is through some reading but mostly from many of my clients who have received chiropractic care.  Despite this I shall put some of my own light on the matter.

When I left osteopathic college back in 1997 I had been taught how to diagnose musculoskelatal pain and how to differentiate that from other conditions that mimic the same symptoms. Chiropractors essentially learn this as well.

When you first visit either a chiropractor or osteopath both will sit down with you and ask you questions about the problem you need help with, your past medical history, your family's medical history, medications you might take and so on. This is called a case history. These questions help us determine whether this is a musculoskeletal problem or if there is any underlying disease or pathology causing your symptoms.

At this point, both chiropractors and osteopaths carry out a physical examination. This is used to help further define the nature of the musculoskeletal cause of your problem or the underlying pathology. Many chiropractors at this point have the tendancy to take xrays of the effected area. This is prudent if you suspect some disease of the joints or bones but many chiropractors use it to determine misalignment  of the spine. Xrays are a necessary evil if you suspect pathology but the dangerous effects of xrays is well documented.

Once the examination is complete both chiropractors and osteopaths will give you a summary of their findings, what diagnosis they have come to, whether they think the treatment they offer will help and a treatment plan. With treatment plans there seems to be a difference in policy between chiropractors and osteopaths. Chiropractors appear to be much more rigid in their treatment plans which seem to be dense and long. For example, a recent client said she had been seeing a chiropractor, 3 times a week for the 1 year and then 2 times a week for the second. Osteopaths, in my experience, will often suggest a couple of treatments per week for the first 2 may be 3 week and then treatments are progressively spread out.

Both chiropractors and osteopaths are taught how to manually manipulate the spine and other joints in the body. Both do this with the aim of increasing the range of motion in restricted joints. From my clients experiences adjustments by chiropractors seem to be more aggressive in nature and some have expressed apprehension when talking about the subject. There also seems to be a tendency chiropractors use adjustment as their exclusive method of treatment. Osteopaths in general are taught a number of different physical treatment approaches including massage, stretching and exercise therapy.

Chiropractors place a strong emphasis on the health of the spine and it's effects on the muscles and the rest of the body.  Osteopaths have a different slant on how they view health in that they believe in the body's innate ability to cure itself. The health of the spine is an important part of that but is only one part of the body. Osteopaths look at the health of the whole body and specifically what is stopping the your body's immune system from helping it self. Osteopaths appear to have a much more holistic approach. They tend to look beyond the spine and look at underlying factors that may be contributing to your body's imbalance. One common factor is what you put in your mouth. This, enviromental factors, lifestyle and stress have a huge effect on the body's ability to fix itself.

So that is some of my light on the difference between chiropractors and osteopaths. I'm sure many will have opinions and my discussion is far from exhaustive but comments will be eagerly accepted.