I am sorry but MONKEY seem to have taken a hard stand where evidenced based practice is concerned.

Are you implying that if there is no evidence then dont treat? If that was the case, then, then why are physios still using electrotherapy, why are compensible bodies paying for 20mins of treatment time, why do people still have back surgeries?

Just to clarify, I am FOR research and collecting evidence, but I believe that its not black or white where applying evidence is concerned. I worked in research for a while and one of the things I learnt is that in conducting an RCT (the best level of evidence I believe), one can NEVER achieve a homogenous population during the investigation. Therefore, the results are as generalisable as the population is. If that was the case, how can one take a hard line on evidence based on a statistical majority of a specific population?

Research will never be perfect, and hence neither will the evidence. Patients will never be the same either, even if they had the same sort of injury. It is thus up to the therapist to utilize their knowledge and skills, incorporate what they know of the evidence and apply the above into a management plan best fitted to the individual client, bearing in mind that if they didnt get it right the first time, that they have a strong base to reassess and reformulate their treatment.

General exercise is a good principle for treating most musculoskeletal injuries. But when one is faced with symptoms resulting from an injury, it may be hard to know what is "common sense" when it comes to exercising and that when I believe a trained physio is invaluable to set one on the right track.

The best evidence that any therapist can apply to their clients is NOT to utilize treatment techniques that have poor evidence-base AND poor physiological-rationale with poor treatment outcomes.