Shiela, You raise a good point about strengthening the OT curriculum. The ACOTE Accreditation Standards are currently being revised. I believe that there will be another comment period later this year. Here is a link to the latest draft standards document: http://www.aota.org/nonmembers/area13/docs/draftstandards105.pdf
You are also right about EBP. This will become even more important as payers require evidence for payment. CA WC is already headed down this road. And if it works in CA, then it will spread to other states. HI and AK are working to impliment similar policies. You can read about proposed regulations in CA to implement this policy online at: http://www.dir.ca.gov/dwc/DWCWCABForum/3.asp?ForumID=41&RegID=184 Full Text http://www.dir.ca.gov/dwc/ForumDocs/MTUS/ProposedSections.pdf 9792.22. Presumption of Correctness, Burden of Proof and Hierarchy of Scientific Medical Evidence (a) The ACOEM Practice Guidelines are presumptively correct on the issue of extent and scope of medical treatment and diagnostic services addressed in those guidelines. The presumption is rebuttable and may be controverted by a preponderance of scientific medical evidence establishing that a variance from the guidelines is reasonably required to cure or relieve the injured worker from the effects of his or her injury. The presumption created is one affecting the burden of proof. (b) For all medical treatment and diagnostic services not addressed by ACOEM, authorized services shall be in accordance with other evidence-based medical treatment guidelines generally recognized by the national medical community and that are scientifically based. (c)(1) For all medical treatment and diagnostic services not addressed by subdivisions (a) and (b) above, or for all medical treatment and diagnostic services in variance with subdivisions (a) and (b) above, the following hierarchy of scientific medical evidence published in peer-reviewed, nationally recognized journals shall apply to determine the effectiveness of different services: (A) Meta-analysis or systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials. (B) Strong research-based evidence (multiple relevant and high quality scientific studies). (C) Moderate research-based evidence (one relevant high-quality scientific study or multiple adequate scientific studies). (D) Limited research based evidence (at least one adequate scientific study). (2) Evidence shall be given the highest weight in the order of the hierarchy of evidence. However, other evidence that is not covered by the hierarchy of evidence may also be considered. >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7/6/2005 3:11:26 PM >>> I am on the other side of the fence about the OT education going to the doctoral level. There are so many OT's that come into the clinic without the background they need at a Masters level. Our PT counterparts graduate from programs that are very very strong in anatomy, physiology, movement, and yes, their cirriculum even includes vision, cognition, and ADL training. We as OT's are not always coming into the clinic prepared with the education levels we currently have. I am a huge advocate for my profession, I applaude OT for the jobs we do and what changes we make in our patients lives. But sometimes we get ahead of ourselves. In my humble opinion, we need to strengthen the cirriculum we currently have by adding more anatomy, physiology, and practicle treatment approaches so when you have an OT and a PT student in the clinic, their book knowledge of the human body does not put them worlds apart. EBP is what PT's do and OT's don't do enough. When was the last time you documented what you did, how you did it and what outcomes in terms of function were acheived? I am forever encourageing the OT's, and the PT's, in my clinic to document and present. This year at the POTA confernce I am proud that three staff OT's are presenting clinical application of our everyday life! But how many do this? And how many back it up with research and literature? We as a profession fall very short of our PT counterparts. I do not think that a doctoral degree will better prepare a student for the clinic or a professional career. I think that after practicing and then returning to the classroom would make a stronger clinician at the doctoral level. I know that some of the PT's coming out with the DPT have said that they have a hard time finding jobs to support the student loans and some have even said that they were thought to be over-qualified because of the "D". We don't need to "follow or get left behind". We need to make our own road, forge ahead with what works for our profession and what works for what we do and what we do well. We need to prepare entry level clinicians for a field that is gettnig smaller by the minute with skills that help them think on their feet and treat whatever comes in the door! These are just my thoughts, rather long and winded... Sheila -- Unsubscribe? [EMAIL PROTECTED] Change options? www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com Archive? www.mail-archive.com/otlist@otnow.com Help? [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Unsubscribe? [EMAIL PROTECTED] Change options? www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com Archive? www.mail-archive.com/otlist@otnow.com Help? [EMAIL PROTECTED]
