Hi Ed'n all:-) I'd like to try and give an outlandish perspective on the name issue: I am from Denmark, and here we don't even have the word "occupation" - which seems quite a loss ie when translating the Cannadian model etc - we still talk about activities, and then has to expand: nescessary, meaningful etc activities. My title is "ergoterapeut". (same "ergo" as in ergonomics). My Dutch, German and Swedish colleagues are each called "arbeitsterapeut" (spelling differs a bit) - meaning something like work-therapist... Not sure what it looks like around the world, but sure solely discussing the word "occupational" woun't get us all on the same page...?
Then fast forward to the word "function" - this easily translates into Danish, I think it has a latin root, which sure helps! But even on this list I've seen it used so broadly, that it seems to loose meaning. One day we are talking about the function of walking - the function of breathing - even the function of a certain muscle. The next day we note that someone is not adressing certain things in a functional way. Seems to me we are back to the basic word "work" again: It functions~= it works..? But on what level? Does your elbow muscle contraction work to the level of creating heat, pain and spasticity; to the level of banging your own nose; or does it assist you in drinking your coffee? So for now, I'm at a loss for how we would better name ourselves, without ever having to elaborate - but I sure am open to suggestions! Has the PT's then had it easier - sure physical therapist is such a precise name, or....? (BTW in Danish it's "fysioterapeut" - we like to take the latin approach:) IMO it's incredibly broad - if I didn't know better, I'd easily think my MD was a physical therapist - I sure never saw him address mental, emotional or spiritual parts of healing. But maybe if I look at it like we go about occupation - that the "physical" is both the road and the destination? Fine, then my chiropractor must be a PT? Yeah, I know - more questions than answers - I just am wondering:-) Warmly Susanne, Denmark ---- Original Message ---- From: "Ed Kaine" <aloft....@gmail.com> To: <OTlist@otnow.com> Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 11:01 PM Subject: Re: [OTlist] Over Utilization of PT in Home Health > Hi All; > > If not in a name... then what? Is PTs service and skill set that > much superior to OTs that it warrants about a 3 to 5 fold bias from > OT to PT in nearly every setting? Your facility is probably fairly > average in the 3 to 15 ratio... and that is home care. > > In the USA OTs are most plentiful treating pediatric populations... > in Canada there is not this strong support for OT. In most settings > there there are at least twice as many PTs as OTs. > > I'm not trying to be rhetorical here... I'm serious... I can't > understand it if it's not due to our incomprehensible name. I think > PT's title is just so obvious in what they can offer and why go to > an OT if you're retired? I got this one again today. Administration > puts their money where they expect volume and return on investment. > In my opinion OT is more efficient at getting functional > outcomes... but we are not known. > > Occupation means what it means... not what we say it means (unless > it did, then it would). I think the concept is useful and we should > try to get the word known, the definition expanded, but my Blog > challenge cannot get it to happen, not within a year or even > several. > > I'd really like your thoughts on the why PT is so successful and we > are so not. > > Yours, > Ed -- Options? www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com Archive? www.mail-archive.com/otlist@otnow.com
