(no subject)

(no subject)

TEC

6/12/1998

Dear Richard,

Thank you very much for your thoughts. Incidentally, I’ve heard from
fellow practitioners as well as patients, that the BAPO meetings are
exceptional…great attendance, excellent organization, and relevant
presentations… Maybe we here in the US could learn a few things from
the British.

Best regards,

Lisa Schoonmaker, CPO
----------
From: TEC Web
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 1998 8:09 AM
To: Lisa S
Subject: email

Subject:
        Politics, manufacturers, etc. A comment from the UK.
  Date:
        Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:34:35 +0000
  From:
        Richard Hirons < <Email Address Redacted> <mailto:<Email Address Redacted>>>
    To:



Richard Hirons@OSSUR
11.06.98 13:34

I'm occasionally entertained by the 'US political' discussions that are
aired on the oandp list, but a little bemused by the public drubbing
that
is directed at certain individuals from time to time. The current issue
regarding whether you people have a relationship with the manufacturers
or
not is interesting in that the essential issue here is the professional
status of prosthetist/orthotists. I'm not familiar with the politics in
the
US and offer no judgement on the issues under discussion, but recognise
issues that must surely be common throughout the world. I have these
personal thoughts to offer to the debate.

As a prosthetist, I can ask myself this question: Do I belong to an
industry or a profession? Are they different, or is it the same?

We, like Dentists and even Orthopaedic Surgeons (just random examples)
are
professionals who are dependent on the use of commercially available
products. In our practice we use these products, need to know how to use
them, and more importantly understand why we are using them and how they
will best serve the objectives that we are trying to satisfy.

I was interested to see a comment about dropping the term 'scientific'
from
the US meetings. This is a shame. There's very little proper science in
P/O, unlike other health professions. I think as prosthetists and
orthotists we are all too wrapped up in 'products'. Not enough is
happening
with regard to techniques and clinical issues. Just think about the
ratio
of R&D funding in prosthetic socket design (I don't mean CADCAM and
silicone and that stuff) to that of components and hardware. There's no
comparison. The same is true with regard to post graduate education. To
the
prosthetic end user, surely the socket is one of the most important
area's
(go on, tell me I'm wrong). This is the area where the profession must
take
a little time out and just deal with and focus on clinical issues,
practice
issues, rehabilitation issues and the like. The profession needs to do
this
and the industry needs to understand that it is not a snub, or a
statement
or whatever. It's part of what we do, possibly the most important part
and
certainly the most underated.

Here in the UK, our professional organisation, BAPO, has made great
efforts
to seek formal recognition of our professional status from the
government
agencies. Just last year we were finally accepted in the Council for
Professions Supplementary to Medicine (CPSM). Our professional status is
now officially recognised.

Yes, I belong to a profession. A profession that is dependant on a
thriving
industry for hardware support. Each is dependent on the other, but each
has
a unique agenda and must be allowed to do their own thing from time to
time
without upsetting the other.

Incidentally, I don't think my hands are 'goofy' and I certainly don't
need
a 'shit filter'. Such impressive vocabulary.

Richard Hirons
Prosthetist.