Hello Joe et. al:

Your comments lead to a very interesting discussion.

When I was teaching, students were TOLD that OT is not a profession that
focuses treatment on the UE. However, students were educated in a manner
that  suggested that this was not the case. For example, they receive an
UE  prosthetics  course  but  not  a LE prosthetics course. Additionally,
students observed in the clinic, that OT's often did focus on the UE. In
my opinion many students were confused by this situation.

The  comments  below SEEM to suggest something similar. From a national
perspective,  there  is  nothing to suggest that OT is an UE profession,
however, the real world suggests something different.

If   the  profession's  leaders  are  saying  one  thing  about  OT  but
practitioners  are  doing  something different, how can this be good for
our profession?

Thanks,

Ron



=============================================

On 3/11/2003,[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

JW> Hi Ron:

JW> I am enjoying this discussion. Would like more folks to put down their
JW> perspectives/ what they are used to.

JW> In   your   question,   you   stated   "professional  organizational
JW> perspective".  Do  you mean the professional organizations- AOTA and
JW> APTA,  or  the work place? If you were referring to AOTA and APTA- I
JW> guess both probably claim equal foothold. However, the difference of
JW> wordings  state  OTs  domain in terms of function (ADL independence,
JW> while   it   is  totally  acceptable  to  work  on  the  performance
JW> components), PTs use the word 'movement dysfunction'- I guess basing
JW> that  synthesis  of  movement occurs through muscle strength, range,
JW> and coordination. The PT practice act allows ADL retraining.

JW> From a work place standpoint, I will refer the case to an OT myself.
JW> (  Until  tomorrow, I work as a rehab services director at a nursing
JW> home. After tomorrow, I join my own home health and therapy contract
JW> company  of  1  year).  I  have  always followed ( for simplicity of
JW> referrals  mainly)  where  OTs  got to treat all UE dysfunctions. My
JW> basis  was  that  if  UE  performance  (ROM, coordination, strength,
JW> sensation,  tonicity)  is  impaired, it directly affects the clients
JW> ability to indulge in ADLs safely or independently. Thus, it is most
JW> appropriate  for  the  OTs  to  see the clients. PTs (although their
JW> practice  act  allow)  rarely  indulge  in  ADL/ functional training
JW> beyond mobility needs- ambulation, transfers, stair negotiation. The
JW> 'typical'  PT  goal  in a case such as elbow dysfunction would be to
JW> achieve elbow flexion to 130 degrees, and/ or extn. to 0 ( ofcourse,
JW> assuming no distal involvement/ nr. injury, etc.). They really would
JW> venture into ability to feed, dress, bathe, work on the computer, or
JW> look at adapting the work station or golf clubs, etc. This will only
JW> cause  the use of another discipline to do that, while PTs can focus
JW> on  the  'movement'  alone.  This  global  outlook  of  OT is what I
JW> believed  in  and  marketed.  In the last 3 years, I may have had to
JW> reclarify  less than 5 orders by doctors that referred an UE case to
JW> a PT.

JW> If  there  are  no  functional  limitations  or safety concerns even
JW> though  the  elbow may have an extension lag of 10 degrees or cannot
JW> flex  beyond  120,  I  am  sure no insurance companies would like to
JW> cover it- whether it is PT or OT.

JW> Joe

JW> ----- Original Message -----
JW> From: "Ron Carson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
JW> To: "Joe Wells" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
JW> Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 8:18 PM
JW> Subject: Re[4]: Fwd: Treatment for a Fractured Elbow


>> Hello Joe:
>>
>> Again, thanks for writing....
>>
>> In your below message, in part, you state:
>>
>> JW> Without  infringing  or challenging any discipline's domain or scope
>> JW> of practice, we must arrive at a facility-specific policy.
>>
>> Will  you  provide comments about referrals to OT or PT from a domain or
>> scope  of  practice  perspective?  In  other  words,  from  professional
>> organizational persepective, which discipline is the best referral for a
>> fractured elbow. Why?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ron Carson
>>
>> P.S.  IF  ANY OTHER READERS WANT TO JOIN IN ON THIS 'DISCUSSION', PLEASE
>> DO  SO. THERE ARE MANY NEW SUBSCRIBERS TO THE LIST AND THEIR COMMENTS ARE
>> ENCOURAGED AND WELCOMED.
>>
>>  =============================================
>>
>> On 3/10/2003,[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> JW> Hi Ron:
>>
>> JW> Without  infringing  or challenging any discipline's domain or scope
>> JW> of  practice,  we must arrive at a facility-specific policy. This is
>> JW> needed  to  ensure  easy understanding for the referral sources, and
>> JW> the clients themselves.
>>
>> JW> You can choose to state that  XYZ Care Center's policy is:
>>
>> JW> 1.  OTs  treat  UE  dysfunction (since the upper extremity basically
>> JW> performs  all  functional  tasks),  while  LE/ back dysfunctions are
>> JW> treated  by  PT  (as  they  work on mobility).
>>
>> JW> 2. PTs work on muscle strength/ ROM/ pain/ balance, OT works on fine
>> JW> motor coordn and ADL functions/ adaptations/ compensation.
>>
>> JW> However,  while these are policies basically to educate the referral
>> JW> systems,   as   an  OT  I  strongly  believe  in  the  offerings  of
>> JW> occupational therapy as a stand-alone rehabilitation discipline that
>> JW> can  address  a  condition  such as elbow fracture by itself. At the
>> JW> same  time,  I realize, the truth of the matter is the PTs were also
>> JW> trained to handle it appropriately. And, that is why it is muddy- PT
>> JW> and OT do not have real delineated roles. Since physical limitations
>> JW> result  in  functional  loss/dysfunction,  PTs claim the head of the
>> JW> problem  (physical  limitations) as their domain, while we claim the
>> JW> tail (the functional loss). Although, we are essentially talking the
>> JW> same body.
>>
>> JW> Taking  another  analogy: you have a choice between an allopath (the
>> JW> modern  day  M.D.) or a naturopath (a ND), or a D.O.. All claim they
>> JW> can treat a disease. Whom will you choose? I would choose based upon
>> JW> the person's reputation, and personal knowledge about the condition.
>> JW> Above  all,  as  a  consumer  who I feel comfortable to go. Will the
>> JW> public choose the MD because of the market recognition of the degree
>> JW> as compared to the other medical degrees? Will the public choose the
>> JW> OT for the elbow?
>>
>>
>>
>> JW> ----- Original Message -----
>> JW> From: "Ron Carson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> JW> To: "Joe Wells" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> JW> Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 2:17 AM
>> JW> Subject: Re[2]: Fwd: Treatment for a Fractured Elbow
>>
>>
>> >> Hello Joe:
>> >>
>> >> I appreciate your answer.  However, in some ways you have muddied my
>> >> thinking because what I am trying to understand is this; what is the
>> >> dilenation, if any, when someone should be referred to OT or PT.  In
>> >> some facilities this is done by upper extremity versus lower extremity.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >>
>> >> Ron
>> >>
>> >> =============================================
>> >>
>> >> On 3/7/2003,[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> JW> Ron:
>> >>
>> >> JW>  Hopefully, the doctor's verdict is not final- it is not that
>> >> JW>  unusual for it to change. What is the extent/ nature of your
>> >> JW>  injury?
>> >>
>> >> JW> I agree with Maria. The practitioner should be confident/
>> >> JW> knowledgable in his area of practice. I don't believe in
JW> segregation
>> >> JW> of body parts or roles for physical and occupational therapy.
>> >> JW> Following-up from my last mailing, I would find it hard to
>> >> JW> comprehend an occupational therapist who says he is working on
>> >> JW> function, and not working directly or indirectly with its
>> >> JW> performanace components such as ROM/ ms. strength/ endurance (good
>> >> JW> buzz: activity tolerance), i.e, using the biomechanical FOR in
>> >> JW> orthopedic cases such as this. Hopefully not, otherwise any
>> >> JW> functional approach without keeping the biomechanical/
>> >> JW> kinesiological aspects in mind, could be detrimental. Or, find me a
>> >> JW> PT that is applying the biomechanical FOR but is in no way
>> >> JW> facilitating the "functional independence" of his patient. However,
>> >> JW> I am an OT myself, and believe in the global impact and range of
>> >> JW> services we offer. Especially, when you expect residual deficits, I
>> >> JW> believe the OT takes on a more crusading role as the
>> >> JW> adaptor/facilitator, teaching or ensuring optimal
>> >> JW> adaptations/compensation to minimize the disability to the best it
>> >> JW> can be. Can a PT do it, too? I am sure we all know of some PTs that
>> >> JW> could do it better than some OTs, and some OTs that can do a better
>> >> JW> job in gait analysis and training than some PTs. For those OTs AND
>> >> JW> PTs that are ready to mark their boundaries, isn't ambulation a
JW> part
>> >> JW> of basic ADLs? Both APTA's and AOTA's practice guidelines claim and
>> >> JW> cover this as their domain.
>> >>
>> >> JW>  Am I proposing a merger of  titles of physical/occupational
>> >> JW> therapist? No as there are certainly other aspects to this, we are
>> >> JW> not prepared or trained for this yet, at least not yet. What would
>> >> JW> insurance companies think of this? What impact will it have on
>> >> JW> medicare dollars? What will our associations do even at the thought
>> >> JW> (it sure as occured to others)- laugh? Ron you are an enlightened
>> >> JW> health professional. What do you think the doctor, or the general
>> >> JW> public would do in your case- who should they choose? With out
>> >> JW> really knowing the difference or with out there being a real
>> >> JW> difference of professional expertise (just the difference of
>> >> JW> individual practitioner's expertise)?
>> >>
>> >> JW> Joe
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> JW> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> JW>   From: Maria Aguilera
>> >> JW>   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> JW>   Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 1:00 PM
>> >> JW>   Subject: Re: Fwd: Treatment for a Fractured Elbow
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> JW>   Hi  Ron:
>> >>
>> >> JW>   Hope your elbow is recovering nicely.  I am a OTR who injuried
JW> her
>> JW> dominant elbow (non work related)many years back while practicing in
JW> Upper
>> JW> extremity/Hand Rehabilitation.  I felt pretty
>> >> JW> comfortable self treating until I realized that I needed further
>> JW> intervention ie,MRI and a clinician who was experienced with my
JW> specific
>> JW> injury(Tricep tear).  It was interferring with the
>> >> JW> quality of my clients' care.  I looked in my area and located a PT
JW> who
>> JW> was very instrumental in my successful outcome.  I think it is
JW> dependent on
>> JW> your comfort level and knowing when to seek
>> >> JW> assistance. I feel it does not matter PT vs. OT if the clinician is
>> JW> working within their knowledge and practice base.   Hope this helps.
>> JW> Maria
>> >>
>> >> JW>    Ron Carson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> JW>     Hello Biraj and others:
>> >>
>> >> JW>     My original question about seeing an OT or PT is really more of
JW> a
>> >> JW>     hypothetical question. While I really did fracture my elbow, it
JW> is
>> >> JW>     doubtful that I will need any therapy. The reason I was asking
JW> the
>> >> JW>     question was to hear readers opinions on when and why to refer
JW> to
>> JW> OT
>> >> JW>     versus PT.
>> >>
>> >> JW>     Thanks,
>> >>
>> >> JW>     Ron
>> >>
>> >> JW>     *************************************************
>> >>
>> >> JW>     On 3/2/2003,you wrote:
>> >>
>> >> JW>     RC> Sorry to hear about your elbow Ron. Hope you feel better
JW> soon.
>> >>
>> >> JW>     RC> As for seeing an OT or PT, won't this depend upon whom you
JW> are
>> JW> referred to
>> >> JW>     RC> by your Orthopedic Specialist. As well as what will your
>> JW> insurance carrier
>> >> JW>     RC> pay you for.
>> >>
>> >> JW>     RC> Take care,
>> >>
>> >> JW>     RC> Biraj
>> >>
>> >> JW>     *********��***********
>> >>
>> >> JW>     Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>
>> >> JW>     In the message's *body*, put the following text: u! nsubscribe
>> JW> OTlist
>> >>
>> >> JW>     ** List messages are archived at:
>> >>
>> >> JW>     http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>
>> >> JW>     *********��***********
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
JW>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
JW> -
>> JW> ------
>> >> JW>   Do you Yahoo!?
>> >> JW>   Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more
>> >>
>> >> *********��***********
>> >>
>> >> 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/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>
>> >> *********��***********
>> >>
>>
>> JW> *********��***********
>>
>> JW> Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> JW> In the message's *body*, put the following text: unsubscribe OTlist
>>
>> JW> ** List messages are archived at:
>>
>> JW> http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> JW> *********��***********
>>
>> *********��***********
>>
>> 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/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> *********��***********
>>

JW> *********��***********

JW> Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

JW> In the message's *body*, put the following text: unsubscribe OTlist

JW> ** List messages are archived at:

JW> http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]

JW> *********��***********

*********��***********

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/[EMAIL PROTECTED]

*********��***********

Reply via email to