I'm a staff person with AOTA, my focus is on state issues, so I can't address everything AOTA that comes up on this listserv.
>>> 1. In my experience, most OT's that do not practice according to the documents. In my experience, the VAST majority of OT's practice as UE PT's where the PRIMARY focus is on assessment and treatment of lost UE function. I've seen the same thing. From a state regulatory standpoint we've worked to prevent OTs work from being focused on the upper extremity through the definitions of OT practice across the states. The scope of pratice document supports the model definition. PTs focus on movement and mobility, it makes sense to me that their focus is in that area (gait training for example). However if there are issues related to occupations, then the OT should be involved. How to get OTs to change practice? I think that happens over time. But I'm not sure how much non-AOTA members read our documents. >>> 2. The type of therapy described by the documents does not fit well in the medical model of care or the current third party reimbursement system. Again from a state perspective, when we developed the model definition of OT we looked at commonly used CPT codes and worked to make sure that a component of the definition covered those codes. >>> While I believe AOTA has documents which clearly articulate OT, these documents are NOT being implemented and in some cases can not implemented. You'll have to explain this a bit more. The model definition of OT passed by the RA in 2004 was signed into law in New Mexico earlier this year and is pending in NC. We'll work with state associations that want to update their practice acts to get this language into law. Current definitions of OT in most state laws were derrived from AOTA model language at some point in the past. AOTA uses its official documents as a basis for policy and payer advocay. We don't always get everything we want acknowledged in policy. The association has 35K members with finite resources. There are 115K practitioners in the USA. Perhaps if more OTs supported the association through their membership more could be done. >>>This is the problem, we (AOTA) says one thing but for a variety of reasons, practitioners are doing something else. It is my belief that somehow, the gap between what we say we do and what we actually do MUST be closed. Until this happens, OT will continue to remain on back steps of health care. I agree with you Ron about the gap and we need to get more people "back into the tent." We need to bridge the gap between education and practice. We need to make sure that our practice will be paid for. We need to promote an understanding of the profession to key decision makers such as insurance companies, referral sources and policymakers. That's what were working on. I guess I disagree with you about OT being on the back steps of health care. The profession has come a long way since 1917. OT is recognized as a benefit in Medicare, IDEA, private insurance and in other programs. There are several hundred OT/OTA programs that are training thousands of new practitioners each year. I don't disagree that there are many challenges for OT, but submit to you that the glass is half full. Chuck -- Unsubscribe? [EMAIL PROTECTED] Change options? www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com Archive? www.mail-archive.com/otlist@otnow.com Help? [EMAIL PROTECTED]
