MSKMag OutLoud

Who is Responsible?

7 min · 1 de may de 2026
Portada del episodio Who is Responsible?

Descripción

I look around the waiting room. There’s an average BMI of about 40. I observe oedematous ankles and a variety of walking aids (some flowery so you know they’re not a temporary feature). I can almost smell the inflammatory soup. A young person sits glued to an iPad, headphones shielding them from the world. No doubt an ADHD diagnosis inbound. The health of the nation has changed, and not for the better. And I wonder, when did MSK care become less about sprained ankles and bad backs, and more about metabolic disease and mental health? But who is responsible for this decline? Scanning the room, my instinct is to lay responsibility at the door of the individual. The media will have us believe that our beloved health service is failing the nation but is it in fact the nation who is failing the health service? As someone who works hard to maintain a healthy, balanced lifestyle, I am of the belief that I need to be accountable for my own health. Not every condition is avoidable or preventable, but I feel that I need to at least do my bit. I’m no teetotal, clean-living vegan, but nor am I held together with statins and gabapentin. Don’t misunderstand me, as a healthcare professional, of course I believe that access to healthcare is important, but with such a high incidence of people living in poor health (89% of deaths in the UK are attributed to non-communicable diseases) surely, we all need to step up and do our bit? I am not, however, optimistic. ‘The Spectrum’, overwhelm, body positivity, and food noise are just some of the reasons one can choose to justify an external locus of control. But these are avoidance tactics. Avoidance of the difficult, the uncomfortable. Avoidance of Responsibility. I hear the food noise; I can hear the packet of biscuits seductively calling me but I’m not a labrador and am able to exercise a degree of self control. Is it always easy? No. The same way that curling up on the sofa might feel more appealing than heading out for a run. We all have choices, and we are all capable of autonomous thought (even if these days we seem not to exercise that particular skill). Before judgement completely takes over however, and I am able to reach the lofty heights of the moral high ground, I am pulled back by the sight of a physiotherapist escorting a patient with magnetic knees back to the waiting room (if you aren’t familiar with magnetic knees, they are the kind that due to years of deconditioning and lack of proper use, are drawn to each other as if the medial femoral condyles are polar opposites!). The patient has just undergone a steroid injection and the physio gives them some instructions about a couple of days rest, then hands them a sheet of exercises. Patient and physio part company like a couple of England football fans*; both hopeful for success, both expecting disappointment. And my judgement shifts, from the patient to the physio. Like a warning light on the dashboard of your car, the focus here seems to be on turning the light off, rather than addressing what triggered the alert in the first place. Corticosteroid and a few clam shells aren’t going to address years of deconditioning, poor diet and social isolation. And I ask myself again, who is responsible? While I still stand by the importance of taking care of our own health, we can only do so if we are educated - if we understand what is going on in our bodies and are aware of our choices. With so much access to information and misinformation it can be a minefield for an individual to navigate. But I see MSK services stuck in the past. Clinicians still treating knees and backs in isolation and failing to treat people. Failing to acknowledge the complexity, and failing to have honest, albeit difficult, conversations. And clinicians have their own set of excuses. Their own reasons for absolving responsibility. No time; out of scope; it only says ‘knee’ on the referral. The system is s**t. Now I do agree that time pressures in MSK services are a limiting factor, and services need a redesign, and I hear clinicians complain, but I don’t see them upskilling to meet this new demographic head on. If time is such a precious commodity, why are we wasting it trying to identify dysfunction rather than discussing dysregulation., Why are we not prioritising conversations about the impact of weight, stress, hormones and sleep on pain and MSK health? I see a dramatically changed patient population, but MSK clinicians failing to acknowledge or keep pace with these changes. Many pay lip service to a biopsychosocial model, remaining entrenched in a ‘lets fix it’ biomedical model, not because they are lazy or ignorant, but because they lack the skills to challenge the status quo in a meaningful way. Why should patients change, if clinicians are not prepared to do so? I do worry that if MSK professionals fail to upskill to meet the shifting demands of health, if they are not willing to take on the responsibility of helping patients to navigate these health challenges, they will become obsolete. But I digress, as this piece is about the responsibility of health and not a debate about the future of MSK services. That is perhaps for another day. I scan the room once again, and wonder if I am being unfair to my MSK colleagues. Why should they take on the nation’s ills, simply because pain is the thing that demands most attention? Shouldn’t the proverbial buck stop with primary care? As the first and most consistent point of healthcare for most patients, they are best placed to provide holistic, ongoing support. Patients might spend several years, sometimes a lifetime, with the same GP practice. Responsibility should surely start here as the best place to effect sustainable change?? True that GP practices are under pressure, but maybe this is being perpetuated by referring away to specialist services with the promise of a solution, only to find patients boomerang back when the problem persists. There is some good news! There is a small, but growing number of GPs who are upskilling in the field of lifestyle medicine. Finally, some responsibility! But just as I begin to fantasise about a world in which all GPs are as skilled in promoting health as they are at treating illness, I look round the waiting room once more. Lifestyle medicine is still the exception, and far from the norm. Once again, I think about responsibility. What caused this epidemic in the first place? Several people sit scrolling on phones, someone opens a packet of crisps, another an energy drink…I’m not sure that the thumb movement involved in scrolling through Instagram requires that level of sugar and caffeine! My heart sinks with the realisation that what we are facing isn’t just about helping people make healthier choices. This is full scale addiction. Smart phones keep our sympathetic nervous system fired up, keeping us in fight or flight for sustained periods. And we now know these things aren’t addictive by default, they were designed that way. Add this to food-like substances, developed to leave you craving more, failing to nourish, creating inflammation and a heightened sense of threat in our nervous systems. The nation needs a detox! So, who is responsible now? The tech companies? Food conglomerates? The Government? Are we fighting a losing battle here, or does this bring us back to the beginning and individual responsibility? The addict can blame their dealer, but it’s supply and demand. We want life to be easy, convenient, and comfortable, but the easy choices in the short term don’t always serve us well in the long term. The important thing to realise is that there is choice. Clinicians can help a person on their health journey, but change will only happen off the back of individual effort. Health isn’t something that can be fixed, and recovery is hard. Our health is the most valuable and precious commodity we will ever possess; how can we not take responsibility for that? *Just to clarify, this is a reference to the men’s game This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mskmag.substack.com/subscribe [https://mskmag.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2]

Comentarios

0

Sé la primera persona en comentar

¡Regístrate ahora y únete a la comunidad de MSKMag OutLoud!

Prueba gratis

Empieza 7 días de prueba

$99 / mes después de la prueba. · Cancela cuando quieras.

  • Podcasts solo en Podimo
  • 20 horas de audiolibros al mes
  • Podcast gratuitos

Todos los episodios

71 episodios

episode The Soft Tissue Cost of Testosterone artwork

The Soft Tissue Cost of Testosterone

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit mskmag.substack.com [https://mskmag.substack.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_7] As testosterone injections become normalised for strength, physique and recovery, emerging research is raising uncomfortable questions about injuries to ligaments, tendons and surgical repairs. Testosterone has had a rebrand. For many people, it no longer seems to sit in the same mental category as ‘performance-enhancing drug’ or ‘anabolic steroid’. It has become wellness-adjacent. Gym-adjacent. Recovery-adjacent. More muscle. Better physique. Faster recovery. More confidence. Back in the gym sooner. Sounds neat. Until the ACL goes. Or the Achilles. Or the biceps tendon. Or the rotator cuff. This is the bit of the testosterone conversation that feels strangely quiet. The online discussion often starts and ends with body composition, energy, libido and performance. But for those of us working in musculoskeletal practice, there is another question worth asking. What is happening to the tissues that have to tolerate all this extra force?

1 de jul de 20261 min
episode Is this the writing on the wall for First Contact and Advanced Practitioners in the NHS? artwork

Is this the writing on the wall for First Contact and Advanced Practitioners in the NHS?

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit mskmag.substack.com [https://mskmag.substack.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_7] In May 2026, the British Medical Association, the largest doctors’ union in the UK, published the findings of a survey of over 5,000 doctors on the role of Advanced Practitioners (APs), with 81% saying that the way APs currently work poses a risk to patient safety. This was reflected in a new position statement from the Royal College of Physicians, suggesting that replacing doctors with other roles created ‘a real risk of fragmented care and harm to patient safety’. To understand the degree of antipathy against APs, we must go back to the beginning (This is where, in a film, the swirly spiral denotes we are going back in time (you can hum the atmospheric tune yourselves…)). The Origin Story It’s the millennium, and there is a steady but unmistakable shift from a model of care that was in place from the inception of the NHS in the 1940s to when I qualified in the early 2000s. The 1-in-2 on-call rotas are rapidly becoming a thing of the past as Modernising Medical Careers and the European Working Time Directive from 2004 onwards reduced the average number of hours worked by doctors and the old ‘firm’ structures (Consultant, Registrar, SHO, HO etc) made way for newer ways of working. Whilst the number of hours doctors worked decreased, the population continued to age and grow, creating a tidal wave of increasing complexity and acuity, placing services under unprecedented demand. The number of patients registered with NHS GPs in England grew significantly, from roughly 50 million in 2020 to just under 64 million by 2025. To meet this growing demand, the Health Foundation suggests that a further 3,500 GPs will be needed by 2031. But it takes a long time to train a doctor; 10+ years as a minimum for GPs, and the number of full-time equivalent GPs has dropped by 458 since 2015. Step into the breach: non-doctor roles. By the time of the NHS long-term plan in 2019, early pilots of first-contact physiotherapists had shown they could be useful members of the primary care team. In 2020, the National Evaluation of the First Contact Practitioner (FCP) model of primary care evaluated 240 FCPs from 40 services in England and found that FCPs were acceptable to patients, produced positive outcomes, and reduced GP workload [1].

1 de jul de 20262 min
episode Physiotherapy Education: Getting Graduates Ready for What Exactly? artwork

Physiotherapy Education: Getting Graduates Ready for What Exactly?

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit mskmag.substack.com [https://mskmag.substack.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_7] Are physiotherapy graduates ready for practice? If you’ve ever asked this question, you’re not alone. The quick answer? No. But they’re not meant to be. The longer answer? Well that starts in 1894… The Start of Physiotherapy Education [Image 1: Almeric Paget Military Massage Corps [8]] Four women drew a line. Stories in the national press were warning the public about ‘unscrupulous’ people offering massage as cover for something else entirely. They set up the Society of Trained Masseuses because the work deserved better. They established a curriculum and examinations. Standards mattered from the very beginning. What followed was a profession that proved itself through necessity. When World War I broke out in 1914, physiotherapists were quickly deployed to military hospitals. They went where the need was greatest. This community instinct, going where people are and working in the places where health matters, was not a policy position. It was simply what the profession did. Recognition followed practice: it always has. So, what does ‘being ready’ really mean for a profession that has always gone where people needed it, and found a different answer every time? Ownership In its earliest years, the physiotherapy classroom and clinic were never far apart. Learning happened close to the work, even without a formal structure. By 1955 that structure arrived in the form of a national syllabus for physiotherapy [1]. Every UK student physiotherapist followed this one pathway - a three-year curriculum taking place in schools attached to a hospital. After an initial six months of training, they spent 1,500 hours or more treating patients under the supervision of qualified physiotherapists, accounting for 10-30 contact hours a week. The final exams were entirely practical, and they assessed and treated patients in the hospital. Assessment papers were sent directly to the professional body to be moderated against a national standard. There was no gap between education and practice because the two had never been separated, everything taking place under one roof. [Image 2: 1955 CSP Syllabus [1]] Interestingly, the syllabus described the preparation of students as “a graduated process of education leading to admission to membership.“ Not admission to a qualification, but admission to a community. To qualify was to join. The professional body set the standards, ran the examinations, and held the membership. Regulation and professional identity were, in practice, the same thing.

1 de jul de 20262 min
episode The Beak Is The Breadcrumb: Tarsal Coalition and the Pain That Points the Wrong Way artwork

The Beak Is The Breadcrumb: Tarsal Coalition and the Pain That Points the Wrong Way

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit mskmag.substack.com [https://mskmag.substack.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_7] A 24-year-old middle distance runner came in with dorsal midfoot pain – just distal to a little lump at the dorsal talonavicular joint. By the time she reached me she’d done the full lap. Foot strengthening. Mobilisations. Expensive custom orthotics. Shockwave. Dry needling. None of it moved the needle. Her running told the same story every time. Fine off the line but pain starting 2 to 3 km into a 5 km run. Every session. She’d already had an MRI from a previous healthcare provider. In a classic case of ‘junk in = junk out’ - there wasn’t much on the report. The referral: ‘ankle pain’, though ideally it would have read ‘dorsal midfoot in runner near palpable prominence at talonavicular joint’. C’mon people…. Radiologists deserve some stories sometimes! Despite an allegedly radiologically-boring midfoot, the report did give away the big clue in the hindfoot: an osseous subtalar tarsal coalition across the sustentaculum tali (without significant stress reaction). Nobody paid it much attention, presumably because nobody was sure what it meant. The beak is a symptom, not a diagnosis A dorsal talar beak is a bony outgrowth on the upper aspect of the talar head, projecting toward the talonavicular joint. It is a traction osteophyte. It forms where the dorsal talonavicular ligament and capsule pull repeatedly on the talus; the foot’s attempt to remodel around mechanics that have gone wrong upstream [1]. The alternative explanation is mechanical: the navicular rides up over the talar head and lifts the periosteum, and bone fills the gap [2]. Either way, the beak is not the villain, it is the breadcrumb. The question worth asking is what is driving it. In a young adult the answer is often a restricted subtalar joint, and the usual culprit is tarsal coalition. What a coalition actually is

1 de jul de 20262 min
episode Chewy and Jim - Navigating The System artwork

Chewy and Jim - Navigating The System

Chewy and Jim are back - the lads were evaporating during the recording this month as the weather matched their opinions for heat… Chewy and Jim is best watched in full via the video above (so you can watch them melt in real time) or you can listen on the usual podcast players. In this recording, Chewy and Jim cover consultations from good to bad and their experiences sitting on both sides. “You can be as good medically or with your assessment as you want, but if you can’t guide the consultation and keep the patient on board and engaged, they’re going to leave unhappy and not getting what they want out of it.” - Jim It’s a real skill to run an effective consultation and this becomes really challenging in situations of complexity or system restrictions (lack of time). Unfortunately when this skill is lacking or not applied, the whole thing falls apart and people leave disappointed and frustrated. Chewy and Jim describe stark contrasts between well run and poorly run consultations and it makes a huge difference to the experience. “The actual technical aspect of conducting a consultation is a really overlooked skill.” - Jim Chewy and Jim get into a discussion about the variables that go into this particular skill and it is not just experience. Appropriate feedback mechanisms, training, and practice are all of vital importance to develop the ability to run the consultation effectively AND sensitively. Without appropriate challenge for poor practice and ongoing complacency that this is not a skill that requires development, variation in practice widens and can cause significant problems for those people attempting to navigate the health systems they require. “Variation in care standards can be refined. It shouldn’t just be accepted that sometimes you get the biscuit muncher and sometimes you get the brilliant clinician.” - Chewy This is a really difficult skill to improve and we will never master it fully; different components of it require work for individuals, Chewy for example never shuts up and Jim can’t wait to end every conversation as quickly as possible… Embracing your own individuality but holding it to within appropriate professional boundaries is the balance to aim for. Never go full Chew! Jim points out that the likely training method for working on this skill is roleplay and that induces massive cringe responses in most but it is an absolute necessity in order to receive instant peer feedback and implement improvements outside of the clinic room that you can take with you. Embrace it and leave your cringe at the door: improvements in this skillset will help every aspect of the clinical consultation including the outcomes. Chewy and Jim are nothing if not desperate for these rants to be clinically applicable tomorrow… Dos and Don’ts for consultations: * Introduce yourself and explain your role/Don’t leave patients guessing who you are. * Set expectations early. * Guide the conversation without being rude/Don’t interrupt abruptly. * Don’t start the consultation distracted or disengaged. Would Chew Rather speak only in technical jargon or only in complete lay language? The answer will likely surprise you… Let us know your answer. If you have any ‘Would Chew Rather?’ or ‘Who Are Chew?’ questions put them in the comments or email them to us mskmag@physio-matters.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mskmag.substack.com/subscribe [https://mskmag.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2]

1 de jul de 202640 min