I work in a SNF and acute care hospital with a lot of new grad PT's who document on ADL. I have been complaining. What they document does not even make the least bit of sense! How can a person be max A with mobility, yet be independent with toileting,dressing, etc.? The will document level of assistance with ADL (usually incorrectly) but then do not document any plan of action. Why document and bill for time spent on an activity that they are not going to truly address? And then I really hate when they will clear patients for independent bathroom privilages but they do not concider the door, the light, the type of clothing they are wearing, or if they can even uncover themselves in bed. PT's do not think about these things. They do not seemed to be trained to see the whole picture. PT's are more respected than OT where I work, for some reason, and I am trying hard to change that. I always introduce myself as an Occupational Therapist, I do not say OT anymore. Anybody that calls me a PT, I emediatly correct. I have tried to put a greater separation between myself and the PT's, consulting with them less and co-treating less. I think a lot of OT's have fallen into the rut of "better than a CNA, but not as good as a PT" especially in the skilled setting. I was told, by my supervisor(who is a PT), that the activities department can be trained to do a kitchen safety group. I said yeah, if they go back to college for Occupational Therapy! We are so misunderstood. I think all of us really need to advocate for our profession.
Suzanne
>From: "Charles Willmarth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Re[4]: Another Issue - This time from PT magazine
>Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 15:33:35 -0400
>
>Janine,
>
>State licensure laws do establish a scope of practice for health professions, but they are not intended to contemplate every technique under the sun. For example, I could only find the terms "gait training" or "gait" in 4 state PT practice acts.
>
>Info about temporary permits/licenses is available on the AOTA website under the "Licensure" member area. Under the heading "State OT Statutes and Regulations" you will see a link to a PDF file called:
>
>"Temporary, Limited And Provisional Permits/Licenses/Documents Available To Occupational Therapy Practitioners by State"
>http://www.aota.org/members/area4/docs/provisions1.pdf
>
>That info was compiled in 1999, so it is a bit dated, but those provisions don't change to much from year to year. Another strategy would be to call the particular state that you're interested in getting a temporary license as you'll have to call them anyway to get the application. There is a list of phone numbers for the state OT boards in the member area.
>
>Chuck
>
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/16/01 09:58AM >>>
>I know the jist of this dialogue is the competition between OT and PT for practice turf, but I feel the desire to support Chuck's line of information from a regulatory perspective.
>
>Many state practice acts do not specifically name PAMs in the scope of OT practice however they offer lists "including but not limited to..." which enables OTs to include physical agent modalities in OT tx. Along the same line, some practice acts to not specifically list sensory integration or NDT which we include in OT without controversy. I feel ALL state regulatory agencies would agree that the use of ANY modality included in OT practice must be accompanied with the ability to document competency in its inclusion, if called upon. As licensed professionals, we need to be able to document competency in all areas of our practice. This is what AOTA and NBCOT have been encouraging professionals to do for decades. This may be on-the-job training, traditional academic preparation or through continuing professional education experiences. Professional portfolios are a wonderful way to collect, and easily access, your competency documentation.
>
>On a side note, Chuck, do you also have an up to date compilation of state laws as they relate to temporary licenses or limited permits for the new graduate?
>
>Janine
>
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/16/01 06:37AM >>>
>No, actually most OT practice acts do not address this issue. If you are interested I can send you a compilation of state laws that address the issue. It is particularly hot in KY right now.
>
><<< [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/15 7:38p >>>
>Hello:
>
>Thanks Chuck.
>
>Are PAMS still an issue?? I was under the impression that
>all OT practice acts already included PAMS.
>
>Ron
>
><<<<< Original Message Follows >>>>>
>
>On Monday, October 15, 2001, Charles Willmarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>-
>CW> Ron,
>
>CW> I would just add that state OT associations and AOTA are closely monitoring PT chapter efforts to inappropriately broaden the PT scope of practice.
>
>CW> PT concerns with OT bills have primarily focused on the issue of PAMs. Language has been crafted to require that OTs get additional training to use modalities to address PT concerns.
>
>CW> Chuck
>
>CW> <<< [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/15 7:08p >>>
>CW> Hello Shelia:
>
>CW> First, I love your comments regarding how you explain the differences
>CW> between OT and PT! I think I will adopt that approach and see what type of
>CW> response I get.
>
>CW> Secondly, I think the PT profession (not necessarily individual
>CW> practitioners) believes that ADL's is well within their scope of practice.
>
>CW> I'm sure you know this but just in case.... Recently, APTA's practice
>CW> guidelines changed to include ADL's and functional retraining in the home to
>CW> be within their professional domain of concern. Practice guidelines often
>CW> form the basis for State's practice acts so there has and still is, State's
>CW> efforts to adopt the guidelines into legal definitions of what PT can and
>CW> can not do.
>
>CW> As State's practice acts change, so does the ability of that State's PT's to
>CW> practice in domains which have traditionally been OT's domain. This is why
>CW> I'm soooo concerned!
>
>CW> If you still have the text of the article, reread the last paragraph. As I
>CW> interpret it, the APTA is saying that they are monitoring OT practice act
>CW> changes to ensure they are supported by educational objectives of the
>CW> profession. Why? Because, it has been our stance that PT's can't practice
>CW> ADL retraining because they aren't educated on it. SO, they are going to
>CW> play tit-for-tat and repay us the "favor" and ensure our education fully
>CW> supports our practice.
>
>CW> This is not necessarily a bad thing but does highlight the competitive
>CW> nature of the professions.
>
>CW> Ron
>
>CW> <<<<< Original Message Follows >>>>>
>
>CW> On Friday, October 12, 2001, sheila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>CW> -
>s>> Just thinking out loud here...
>
>s>> I know what OT is. I am an OT and I love it and I
>s>> believe in it. However, I acknowledge the fact that
>s>> PT has something to offer people with disabilities,
>s>> too. What I don't know is exactly what it is that PT
>s>> has to offer.
>
>s>> I hate to bring up the issue of comparing OT to PT in
>s>> an attempt to explain the role of one or both
>s>> professions, but it seems to me that this is what
>s>> needs to be done. Often people ask me how OT and PT
>s>> are different and my response is always to explain to
>s>> them what OT is, and then refer them to a PT to
>s>> explain what PT is, because I do not feel that I can
>s>> fully explain PT's role as well as a PT could. After
>s>> all, I went to OT school not PT school!
>
>s>> I used to be comfortable handling it this way, but now
>s>> I feel that I need to be aware a what PT really thinks
>s>> their role is, because based on the article that Ron
>s>> sent below, it sounds as if they think they are
>s>> responsible for ADL/self care retraining.
>
>s>> Do they mean this in regard to mobility during ADLs
>s>> only or in regard to other components and performance
>s>> areas and contexts typically addressed by OT during
>s>> ADLs (ie., UE ROM and strength, cognition, fine motor
>s>> skills, sensation, environmental adaptations, adaptive
>s>> equipment training, etc.) I surely do not think that
>s>> PTs believe that the examples above are in their scope
>s>> of practice, do they? Please, someone enlighten me.
>s>> Thank you.
>s>> Sheila
>
>
>s>> --- Ron Carson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> >>> Hello All:
> >>>
> >>> It's ironic how things happen because this PM (the
> >>> same day I posted the
> >>> message about the Stroke Magazine article), I was
> >>> given the following from
> >>> PT Magazine's October 2001 edition, page 29.
> >>>
> >>> WHAT FOLLOWS IS THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE IN ITS
> >>> ENTIRETY.................
> >>>
> >>>
>s>> ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> >>>
> >>> State OT associations, backed by their national
> >>> association, continued their
> >>> campaign to limit a traditional area of physical
> >>> therapy practice - ADL's
> >>> and self-care. OT organizations argue that PT's
> >>> have recently entered these
> >>> areas in an attempt to broaden PT's scope of
> >>> practice. PT education and
> >>> practice, however, have long supported these areas
> >>> of PT. This is a battle
> >>> that is taking place in both the legislative and
> >>> regulatory arenas. It is
> >>> being used to oppose PT legislative initiatives and
> >>> modifications to
> >>> regulations governing PT practice.
> >>>
> >>> Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland,
> >>> Mississippi and New
> >>> Hampshire all addressed a variety of OT-related
> >>> legislation in 2001,
> >>> including its inclusion in workers' compensation
> >>> programs, creation of
> >>> independent OT boards, and implementation of
> >>> sweeping changes in OT practice
> >>> acts.
> >>>
> >>> Forecast: APTA is monitoring this push to introduce
> >>> OT practice act
> >>> legislation in state legislatures around the
> >>> country. The Association will
> >>> continue to work with state chapters to ensure that,
> >>> if this type of
> >>> legislation passes, that will establish a scope of
> >>> practice that accurately
> >>> reflects the education and clinical training of the
> >>> OT.
> >>>
> >>>
>s>> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> >>>
> >>> If you ever doubt that there is REAL competition
> >>> between OT and PT then this
> >>> should help change your mind. I guess the real
> >>> question is what, as both
> >>> individuals and an organization, can/should we do to
> >>> address the issues
> >>> raised by this article.
> >>>
> >>> Ron
> >>>
> >>> ********************
> >>>
> >>> Unsubscribe by sending a message to
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message's body, put the
> >>> following text:
> >>>
> >>> unsubscribe OTlist
> >>>
> >>> ------
> >>>
> >>> OTnow messages are archived at:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/
[email protected] (and)
> >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/
[email protected]
> >>>
> >>> ********rC***********
> >>>
>
>
>s>> __________________________________________________
>s>> Do You Yahoo!?
>s>> Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
>s>> http://personals.yahoo.com
>
>s>> ********************
>
>s>> Unsubscribe by sending a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message's body, put the following text:
>
>s>> unsubscribe OTlist
>
>s>> ------
>
>s>> OTnow messages are archived at:
>
>s>> http://www.mail-archive.com/
[email protected] (and)
>s>> http://www.mail-archive.com/
[email protected]
>
>s>> ********rC***********
>
>CW> ********************
>
>CW> Unsubscribe by sending a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message's body, put the following text:
>
>CW> unsubscribe OTlist
>
>CW> ------
>
>CW> OTnow messages are archived at:
>
>CW> http://www.mail-archive.com/
[email protected] (and)
>CW> http://www.mail-archive.com/
[email protected]
>
>CW> ********rC***********
>
>
>
>
>CW> ********************
>
>CW> Unsubscribe by sending a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message's body, put the following text:
>
>CW> unsubscribe OTlist
>
>CW> ------
>
>CW> OTnow messages are archived at:
>
>CW> http://www.mail-archive.com/
[email protected] (and)
>CW> http://www.mail-archive.com/
[email protected]
>
>CW> ********rC***********
>
>********************
>
>Unsubscribe by sending a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message's body, put the following text:
>
>unsubscribe OTlist
>
>------
>
>OTnow messages are archived at:
>
>http://www.mail-archive.com/
[email protected] (and)
>http://www.mail-archive.com/
[email protected]
>
>********rC***********
>
>
>
>
>********************
>
>Unsubscribe by sending a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message's body, put the following text:
>
>unsubscribe OTlist
>
>------
>
>OTnow messages are archived at:
>
>http://www.mail-archive.com/
[email protected] (and)
>http://www.mail-archive.com/
[email protected]
>
>********rC***********
>
>********************
>
>Unsubscribe by sending a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message's body, put the following text:
>
>********************
>
>Unsubscribe by sending a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message's body, put the following text:
>
*********��***********
Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the message's *body*, put the following text:
unsubscribe OTlist
List messages are archived at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/
