Almost two thirds of respondents( 61.3 %, n = 144) practised in metropolitan areas, 40.9 %( n = 96) practised in regional areas and 3 %( n = 7) described their practice location as remote.
Figure 1. Live Webinar with ATMS CEO Annie Gibbins. Friday, 4 July 12pm AEST
Statistical analysis Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data, following data cleaning. Simple tables and graphs were produced for each closed question. All percentages were reported using valid percentages, which excluded missing data. Openended questions were analysed by categorising unstructured text into meaningful topics, ideas or recurring patters. Through a process of repeatedly going back to the unstructured text and refining, coalescing and discarding topics, ideas and recurring patterns, final themes were identified.
Results
A total of 236 responses were received, representing 2.6 % of ATMS’ Accredited Members and Fellows.
Practitioner profile
All respondents provided their main practice modality: 60.2 %( n = 142) reported naturopathy, 33.5 %( n = 79) reported remedial massage therapy, 22.9 %( n = 54) reported herbal medicine and 18.6 %( n = 44) reported nutrition. All reported modalities are presented in Table 1.
A total of 68 %( n = 159) of respondents reported having more than one qualification. Of those, 21.3 %( n = 34) reported have a second qualification in natural medicine; 0.2 %( n = 3) reporting having a non-natural medicine qualification( psychotherapy, pharmacy, midwifery and general nursing); and 73 %( 116) reported having more than one other natural medicine qualification. Six responses were invalid.
Almost half of respondents( 49.2 %, n = 116) had been in practice for 21 years of more, 17.8 %( n = 42) for 0-5years, 20.3 %( n = 48) for 11-20 years and 12.7 %( n = 30) for 6-10 years( see Table 3).
Table 3. Years in Clinical Practice
YEARS IN CLINICAL PRACTICE
FREQUENCY %( N)
0 – 5 years 17.8( 42) 6 – 10 years 12.7( 30) 11 – 20 years 20.3( 48) 21 + years 49.2( 116)
TOTAL 100( 236)
A total of 50.6 %( n = 119) of respondents were registered with health funds and another 25.5 %( n = 60) had previously been registered. See Table 4.
Table 1. Primary practice modality
PRIMARY PRACTICE MODALITY
FREQUENCY %( N)
Acupuncture |
4.7( 11) |
Aromatherapy |
3.0( 7) |
Ayurvedic Medicine |
0.4( 1) |
Bowen Therapy |
1.7( 4) |
|
Chinese Herbal
Medicine
|
1.7( 4) |
Chinese Massage |
1.3( 3) |
Counselling |
4.7( 11) |
Herbal Medicine |
22.9( 54) |
Homeopathy |
9.8( 23) |
Hypnotherapy |
0.9( 2) |
Kinesiology |
3.0( 7) |
Naturopathy |
60.2( 142) |
Nutrition |
18.6( 44) |
Osteopathy |
0.4( 1) |
Reflexology |
3.4( 8) |
Massage Therapy |
10.2( 24) |
Remedial Massage |
33.5( 79) |
Shiatsu |
1.3( 3) |
Other |
9.2( 22) |
TOTAL |
100( 236) |
The majority of respondents( 77.5 %, n = 183) described their typical practice setting as sole practitioner. This was followed by multi-disciplinary clinic( 22.9 %, n = 54) and online / telehealth( 21.2 %, n = 50). Other practice settings included mobile visits and coaching platforms( see Table 2.).
Table 2. Practice settings
PRACTICE SETTING FREQUENCY %( N)
Sole practitioner 77.5( 183) Multidisciplinary clinic 22.9( 54) Mobile / Home visits 8.1( 19) Online / Telehealth 21.2( 50)
Educational or online coaching platform
3.4( 8) TOTAL 100( 236)
Table 4. Registered with health funds
REGISTERED WITH HEALTH FUNDS
FREQUENCY %( N)
Yes 50.6( 119) No 17.5( 41)
Previously, but currently inactive
Not applicable to my modality
25.5( 60)
6.4( 15) TOTAL 100( 235)
Billing and Consultation Practices
More than half of respondents( 55.5 %, n = 131) described billing according to the type of consultation, that is, initial or subsequent consultation. Almost a third( 31.4 %, n = 74) billed according to consultation time( e. g. 30 minutes or 60 minutes). Only 4.7 %( n = 11) billed by bundled services( e. g. consultation + product / program). The remaining 8.05 %
JATMS | Spring 2025 | 131