Nursing diagnosis "altered energy field"

chadash · Feb 15, 2006

OK here goes: I really am interested to see how different folks on different sides of this issue solve this problem:

In a set of cards, each card has a number on one side and a letter on the other. four cards are laying on the table. They show an 'I', a 'N', a '6' and a '3'. someone suggest the hypothesis: if a card has a vowel on one side then it has an odd number on the other side.

Your mission, if you decide to accept it, is to determine which cards must be turned over to test the hypothesis. No card is to be turned over unless necessary to test the hypothesis.

Remember the cards are

I N 6 3

I am of course not telling you what is on the reverse side of these cards.

Come on, you can do it. Dont tell why you chose what you chose until others give their answers. You can explain later.

kadokin, ASN, RN · Feb 15, 2006

I guess I'm not doing a good job of making my thoughts clear here. I firmly believe that the "laying on of hands", "therapeutic touch", massage, etc. are of great benefit to patients, and too often lacking in the nursing care of most patients.
What I question is the notion that any of this is related to a practitioner's manipulation of an "energy field". THAT is what I want to see researched and substantiated and incorporated into evidence-based practice.
Instead of developing new and questionable nursing diagnoses that support the referral of a patient to a TT or Reiki practitioner, why not advocate for adequate nurse:patient ratios that allow the NURSE to perform hands-on care?

HELLO!. When I was in nursing school, we spoke of therapeutic touch as something entirely different. i.e.-holding a pt's hand when they are going through a painful procedure; a reassuring pat on the back. This type of thing. Less than 5 yrs later, a colleague who was pursuing his RN asked me if I had ever heard of this "energy field" business. It sounded like someone took the idea of healing human touch and just RAN WILD w/it. No disrespect to cultures that see this as a legitimate part of their alternative medicine repretoire, but what gives? And, BTW, where I work, nursing DX are not even used anymore. I think, sometimes, they just serve to alienate the other disciplines b/c they don't understand the arcane language and structure that nu dx employs. Any one else feel like they spent an inordinate amount of time in nursing school learning a language that no one else speaks? Or am I the only one? :rolleyes:

kadokin, ASN, RN · Feb 15, 2006

OK here goes: I really am interested to see how different folks on different sides of this issue solve this problem:
In a set of cards, each card has a number on one side and a letter on the other. four cards are laying on the table. They show an 'I', a 'N', a '6' and a '3'. someone suggest the hypothesis: if a card has a vowel on one side then it has an odd number on the other side.
Your mission, if you decide to accept it, is to determine which cards must be turned over to test the hypothesis. No card is to be turned over unless necessary to test the hypothesis.
Remember the cards are
I N 6 3
I am of course not telling you what is on the reverse side of these cards.
Come on, you can do it. Dont tell why you chose what you chose until others give their answers. You can explain later.

What? Where did this come from? I and 3, right? Hey, is this a trick question? No, no, wait a minute, you have to turn ALL of them over to PROVE the theory. At least in this test, right, right? Yes I believe that's it. No stone unturned. But that only proves it for THIS PARTICULAR set of cards. Am I right? :rolleyes:

chadash · Feb 15, 2006

What? Where did this come from? I and 3, right? Hey, is this a trick question? No, no, wait a minute, you have to turn ALL of them over to PROVE the theory. At least in this test, right, right? Yes I believe that's it. No stone unturned. But that only proves it for THIS PARTICULAR set of cards. Am I right?

Cant say yet. Dont want to give it away!

This is a test of critical thinking. Think it is right on with this subject.

kadokin, ASN, RN · Feb 15, 2006

Ok, so if you think accupuncture research only looks at the mechanism, I can see your view. But what about physics? What about all the work that has been done in that field? Are we just to negate hard science and say it isn't relevant because we don't know how to measure it? AND, let's look at this from a cultural aspect--there are MANY non-western cultures in which people will TELL YOU that their energy flow is "blocked", "unbalanced", etc. So, do we only give credence to things that are Western medicine? And, if so, then we better start holding ALL of Western medicine to the same standard that we hold non-Western medicine to...that should dramatically reduce the ICD-10, DSM-IC, NANDA and any other standardized taxonomy--probably most especially the CPT codes since MANY, MANY, MANY of those interventions have ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS IN SCIENTIFIC, RESEARCH-BASED FACT!

Hard reality here: Tell that to the insurance companies. Do you really think they will pay for rx that is not backed by research?

Oh, btw, as far as EBT goes, I have become a true believer since my facility has adopted the decreased restraint policy.

I'm telling you, my anecdotal experience backs up the research numbers. People at high risk of falling suffer less injuries when you find other interventions besides putting them in a geri chair or tying them in bed. Nursing needs good repeatable research to legitamize it's practice.

REALLY:rolleyes:

kadokin, ASN, RN · Feb 15, 2006

Anilina: I hope I do this right I have never posted to a web site before. I am responding to the.Nursing Diagnosis (altered energy fields) My nursing carear has been on a med/surg floor for over thirty years. I have never felt any type of energy riadating from my pt, however I do know that touch means a lot to a pt when they are hurting or when they are afraid.

YES! EXACTLY!

kadokin, ASN, RN · Feb 15, 2006

"The healing modalities of Healing Touch/Therapeutic Touch (HT/TT), Reiki and Polarity Therapy all share some features in common. These techniques detect and correct energetic imbalances in the human energy field through the trained hands of the practitioners. There are scores of well-designed scientific studies that document physiological changes such as improved oxygenation, improved blood counts and accelerated wound healing with the use of HT/TT.
These studies are published in nursing journals and complementary/alternative publications, but are conspicuously absent from most medical journals. Apparently, the concept of the human energy field causes intellectual indigestion in the Western medical community - something akin to "I wouldn't believe it even if it were true." For a medical journal to publish a study on HT/TT, they would have to challenge the mechanistic (Newtonian), biomedical model which is the basis of our understanding of the human body.
My belief in the biomedical model was challenged shortly after completing residency training in Family Practice. I met a nurse who used TT on patients in the hospital, and showed me how to do TT. As she waved her hands in the air, I couldn't help but think this was some absurd vestige left over from the Dark Ages. Fortunately for me, that nurse put up with my skepticism and went on to marry me. Eventually I came around, because I saw that TT often produces dramatic clinical results. Based on the biomedical model, TT should do nothing or at most have a placebo effect. The only conclusion left for me to draw was that somehow the biomedical model was inadequate to explain what I was observing clinically.
Dr Robert Becker - a respected orthopedic surgeon and author of The Body Electric and Cross Currents - has documented the wide range of research on the effects of electricity and electromagnetic fields on the body. Dr Becker and other researchers have found that an injury is accompanied by an abnormal electric charge and that electrons flow to the site of injury as a part of the normal healing process. This flow of electrons has been termed the current of injury and this principle has been used for over 20 years in the field of orthopedics to stimulate healing of bone fractures.
In addition, Dr Becker and several researchers have found that the Acupuncture points and meridians are actually low resistance electrical pathways. So while a practitioner of TCM may alter the flow of Chi in the body, a Western researcher would describe it as changing the flow of DC current. The Acupuncture meridians and points are essentially the electric grid of the body." Milton Hammerly, MD

COOL! Where are the numbers?

kadokin, ASN, RN · Feb 15, 2006

Sorry, I couldn't stay away. Using philosophical arguments to defend non-evidenced based practice is a smoke screen. However, I understand. There are no other practical arguments to make. Even a high school student was able to prove TT is a sham! TT practitioners are left with denying the efficacy of modern medicine, claiming TT is unstudy-able, using philosophic clichés and anecdotal success stories. FYI...Trees always make sound waves when they fall, the egg came before the chicken and Bart Simpson solved the riddle of one hand clapping!

Bart S solved that riddle? I missed that episode. Tell me more. How can something be unstudyable? If it works, numbers should prove it out. Maybe I don't get it. While I wholeheartedly defend EBP, to tell you the truth, research studies put me to sleep. Begin flaming . . . .Now.

kadokin, ASN, RN · Feb 15, 2006

It won't happen unless there is an observer there to observe it. I remember back in the 80s when I was working on my CNS in psych and was studying family therapy, I found an article in a Family Therapy Journal about a South American researcher who was studying frog vision. He came to the same conclusion - that nothing occured unless it was observed. Now, I'm trying to remember why such an article was in a Family Therapy Journal and what connection there was to family therapy!

ha ha. ha ha ha. ha ha ha ha. ha ha ha ha ha. Family Therapy Journal! ha ha ha ha ha ha. Really, though, if you are arguing that nothing occurs unless it is observed, doesn't that bump into the realm of philosophy rather than science? Then again, what is science? If eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable, what do we have to believe in any more? Too deep for me. :uhoh3:

dukeRN · Feb 15, 2006

Thanks for the information and clarification.
It is not an intervention that I currently use, nor have to the time nor inclination to learn at the present time. I can see certain times and practices where others might consider it.
I'm still not sure it undermines the profession.
Danu, do nursing students really have to learn TT? I haven't heard of the programs here requiring it.
I'm more of the scientific mode of thinker myself. But if there are nursing diagnosises pertaining to the spiritual condition of the patient, it is not a stretch for me to consider this one either, though I probably won't practice it.

Maybe one might consider more psychosocial diagnoses and the utilization of "therapeutic touch" if the powers that be would allow us more time at the bedside and less time spent doing random and repetitive paperwork. I feel like everytime JCAHO comes through they make us do some new useless bounty of paperwork, but yet they never recommend that we spend more time at the bedside actually providing nursing care, (and thus less time on the computer charting). I find that sad, but yet, typical. (my hands are on my hips right now!!)

zenman · Feb 15, 2006

zenman said " Yes, Western medicine has failed big time. Think of all the chronic diseases...arthritis, hypertension, diabetes...and then ask yourself "why are they chronic?"
Quote by SFCardiacRN
"Dr. Weil is another crackpot nutritionist that thinks garlic and whole wheat can cure everything."
I believe all the crackpot nutritionists will have the last laugh, after all. There is growing evidence that chronic conditions are a direct cause of our poor western nutrition. If we ate better diets, maybe our energy fields wouldn't be altered:idea:
Rebecca

In Eastern medicine food is considered medicine. It's only been recently that the word "nutrition" was even mentioned in Western medical schools.

chadash · Feb 15, 2006

What? Where did this come from? I and 3, right? Hey, is this a trick question? No, no, wait a minute, you have to turn ALL of them over to PROVE the theory. At least in this test, right, right? Yes I believe that's it. No stone unturned. But that only proves it for THIS PARTICULAR set of cards. Am I right?

no one else was interested so....

The answer is the I and the 6. {There was no trick. These are Wason' s cards. It was a way of helping understand science. sort of.}

I have not found a clear answer any where, but this is how I think it works.

You turn over the I to see if there is an odd number there. If there is, great! You need to go on to one other card....cause you cant be sure yet... you would not turn over the 3, it doesnt matter if there is a consonant or vowel there. Remember your hypothesis. For the same reason, you dont turn over your consonant. ( Am I spelling that right?) So you turn over the even number to confirm there is NOT a vowel there. Ta dum!

So, if you only turn over what you have to to prove or disprove the hypothesis, it would be the I and the 6.