Perhaps someone will take the time to find examples to the contrary, but I can't say I know of any chiros who market themselves as "primary care" anything. It may come up in discussions like this, but it's not something used in public advertising or marketing, as far as I've seen. I think your whole "misleading the public" premise is false. If someone wants to see a chiro, they can and do. People will sometimes come to my office saying "I've never been to a chiropractor before"; they never come in saying "I'm confused as to what chiropractors do. Are you going to remove my gallbladder today? I hope so, because it's really bothering me".
"Unfortunately for you, DC's have physician status in the US which is confined to contain only MD/DO/DPM/DDS/DC and OD."
-Vanbamm
It would be great if all DCs were simply interested in practicing within their scope, being honest with patients, not marketing something they aren't, but frankly, I see evidence to the contrary almost every time a DC discussion comes up on SDN. It seems like the old guard of individuals who wanted to practice spinal manipulation are starting to fade away, and newer DCs seems to want to be 'more' without doing any additional training, testing, education, etc.
Additionally, you can use exaggerated examples all day long, but the fact of the matter is that the 'primary care provider' shingle IS confusing to a patient who, as you stated, maybe has never seen a DC and is unsure of what they do. When this patient walks into the office that says 'primary care provider,' and says 'I'm clueless, what do you do,' do you think this DC, who has already made it clear that he/she has no intention of staying within proper bounds, is going to explain what they do, or do you think it's going to be some rant about 'primary care with an emphasis on musculoskeletal treatment' while the patient is paying cash for some homeopathic remedy and thinking he/she has been examined by a professional and is fine??? Obviously this person knows the difference between a surgeon who would remove your gallbladder and a general practitioner, but do you think he or she knows the difference between a 'primary care provider (DC)' and a 'primary care provider (DO/MD)?' I just don't see how this isn't dangerous, nor does Vanbamm's attitude toward his status as a 'physician' convince me that DCs don't see themselves as something more than Chiropractors
True! We are not on the "team", so to speak. Which explains why there is so much confusion and misinformation among "mainstream medicine" about chiros, much more so than among the general public, who understands very well what chiros do. It's so obvious here on SDN that most pre-meds and med students (and some attendings) simply regurgitate what they've been told along the way about chiropractors without ever taking the time to do their own investigation on the topic; perpetuate the myths. Amazingly, despite being healthcare outsiders, if you will, chiros have survived for over 100 years, and now with ever-increasing research behind what we do, we are gaining ground in terms of inter-professional relations. You are absolutely right when you say we aren't part of the equation, and as such the MD's reflex referral for MSK problems is to a PT, because that is what MDs are trained to do. And not that there's anything wrong with a referral to PTs for MSK problems. But when the amount of research for spinal manipulation and chiro care for neck and back conditions is at least as strong, and often stronger, than that for PT care, you cannot ignore chiro care if you wish to be evidence-based. How's that for spin.
I don't think docs are trained to not refer to DCs ... nor do I think the huge push against DCs that the AMA led YEARS ago is still alive in the presence of MD/DOs today. Frankly, I think they refer to PTs for MSK complaints because, like someone else pointed out, they are often associated with hospital outpatient rehab clinics, etc, and DCs simply aren't. It isn't some sort of conspiracy or inability to think outside of some trained response, it's just what makes sense.
Additionally, maybe it's just me, but I'd be far more inclined to refer to a DO who practiced (frequently) or specialized in OMM. I see this as far more of a general MSK solution than care restricted to spinal manipulation alone.
