(no subject)
TEC
Description
Collection
Title:
(no subject)
Creator:
TEC
Date:
6/9/1998
Text:
----------
From: Anne
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 1998 11:14 AM
To: Lisa S
Subject: AOPA/AAOP letter
We thought you o and p list participants might like to be aware of this
situation. We welcome your comments. Lisa
===========
June 9, 1998
Mr. Robert T. Van Hook, CAE
Executive Director, AOPA
O & P National Office
1650 King Street, Suite 500
Alexandria, VA 22314
Subject: AOPA’s rejection of all manufacturers presenting
at the September ‘98 National meeting in Chicago
Dear Bob,
We would like to respond to the information we recently received
regarding the rejection of all manufacturers’ applications to speak at
the AOPA National meeting scheduled in Chicago in September 1998.
We believe, as a manufacturer and as CPOs that this carte blanche
restriction is at very best, a poor decision. If AOPA has concerns
about the materials being presented, then a format should be set up to
define what is considered to be scientific evidence versus sales
techniques. If the exclusion of manufacturers becomes a continued
philosophy of AOPA, the manufacturers will simply ask certified
practitioners to represent them in a private fashion, thus presenting
the manufacturer’s information through individual practitioners.
In our opinion, AOPA would be far better off setting up a standard for
scientific presentations and requiring that presentors stay within those
standards. Having attended many, many, many of these meetings, both
AOPA and AAOP, I (Carl Caspers), can tell you that my personal feelings
are that the general scientific presentations are by and large,
subjective presentations. The content typically is not based on
scientific evidence when presented to our organization.
We believe that allowing manufacturers to present, using a standard,
required format would be a much more appropriate way to tell the general
manufacturers and suppliers that if they are going to contribute to
scientific evidence and presentation, that they must in fact, present
scientific information. These sessions are not to be regarded as a
sales format for their particular products.
page two
Robert Van Hook, CAE
Executive Director, AOPA
We feel that AOPA is making a mistake in skirting this situation by
eliminating manufacturers as a whole, rather than meeting them head on
and insisting that the presentation be scientific. Our common goal
should be to improve the content of scientific presentations given at
either AOPA or AAOP.
The practitioners and patients are the ones who ultimately lose out when
any individual or group cannot present their findings, because the
audience does not receive new data. Data that can be used to support
clinical decisions about component choices. This scientific data
should be made available for the following reasons:
1) practitioner education
2) patient education
3) detailing referral sources
4) justification to 3rd party payers
In summary, we would ask that you reconsider the decision that has been
made to eliminate all scientific presentations by manufacturers at AOPA
and AAOP meetings. Change the requirements for presentations and insist
that the presentations in fact, be scientific rather than sales
oriented. If a manufacturer cannot abide by these strictures, then they
(as an individual entity) should not be allowed to present at future
meetings.
We appreciate your prompt response to this matter.
Sincerely,
Carl A. Caspers, CPO Lisa M. Schoonmaker, CPO
/aeo
From: Anne
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 1998 11:14 AM
To: Lisa S
Subject: AOPA/AAOP letter
We thought you o and p list participants might like to be aware of this
situation. We welcome your comments. Lisa
===========
June 9, 1998
Mr. Robert T. Van Hook, CAE
Executive Director, AOPA
O & P National Office
1650 King Street, Suite 500
Alexandria, VA 22314
Subject: AOPA’s rejection of all manufacturers presenting
at the September ‘98 National meeting in Chicago
Dear Bob,
We would like to respond to the information we recently received
regarding the rejection of all manufacturers’ applications to speak at
the AOPA National meeting scheduled in Chicago in September 1998.
We believe, as a manufacturer and as CPOs that this carte blanche
restriction is at very best, a poor decision. If AOPA has concerns
about the materials being presented, then a format should be set up to
define what is considered to be scientific evidence versus sales
techniques. If the exclusion of manufacturers becomes a continued
philosophy of AOPA, the manufacturers will simply ask certified
practitioners to represent them in a private fashion, thus presenting
the manufacturer’s information through individual practitioners.
In our opinion, AOPA would be far better off setting up a standard for
scientific presentations and requiring that presentors stay within those
standards. Having attended many, many, many of these meetings, both
AOPA and AAOP, I (Carl Caspers), can tell you that my personal feelings
are that the general scientific presentations are by and large,
subjective presentations. The content typically is not based on
scientific evidence when presented to our organization.
We believe that allowing manufacturers to present, using a standard,
required format would be a much more appropriate way to tell the general
manufacturers and suppliers that if they are going to contribute to
scientific evidence and presentation, that they must in fact, present
scientific information. These sessions are not to be regarded as a
sales format for their particular products.
page two
Robert Van Hook, CAE
Executive Director, AOPA
We feel that AOPA is making a mistake in skirting this situation by
eliminating manufacturers as a whole, rather than meeting them head on
and insisting that the presentation be scientific. Our common goal
should be to improve the content of scientific presentations given at
either AOPA or AAOP.
The practitioners and patients are the ones who ultimately lose out when
any individual or group cannot present their findings, because the
audience does not receive new data. Data that can be used to support
clinical decisions about component choices. This scientific data
should be made available for the following reasons:
1) practitioner education
2) patient education
3) detailing referral sources
4) justification to 3rd party payers
In summary, we would ask that you reconsider the decision that has been
made to eliminate all scientific presentations by manufacturers at AOPA
and AAOP meetings. Change the requirements for presentations and insist
that the presentations in fact, be scientific rather than sales
oriented. If a manufacturer cannot abide by these strictures, then they
(as an individual entity) should not be allowed to present at future
meetings.
We appreciate your prompt response to this matter.
Sincerely,
Carl A. Caspers, CPO Lisa M. Schoonmaker, CPO
/aeo
Citation
TEC, “(no subject),” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 1, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/210582.
