Are we Complacent

Are we Complacent

Dear Colleagues,

It is becoming clear that this field not only needs a stronger academic
focus, it also needs a stronger and more coordinated INTEREST in an academic
focus.

I believe we have many progressive prosthetists operating in relative
isolation who may or may not be comfortable with internet type communication.
We are missing their voice. Identifying them might be a first step.

I think we have a great number of prosthetists whose business focus takes
more of a demand on their time and interest, and/or feel they don't have the
time or need for more definitive understanding.

Prescriptions are often determined and carried out without critical attention
to new components and materials , and without the benefit of useful relevant
research, either because it doesn't exist or there is no awareness of it.
This responsibility is shared by physicians, but because we are the experts,
this should be steeered by our efforts.

As the field struggles for its professional standing, I hope that standards
of excellence will come from current particpation in meaningful seminars, and
research projects directed by a prosthetist focus.

It has been pointed out to me that the Academy should be the definitive forum
for rigorous determination of modern prosthetic prescription and for guiding
research, and developing advanced training in conjunction with university
programs.

I think re-invigorating the Academy is a fine idea, if we can have the
participation of those in the field that are sufficiently concerned. I am
relatively new to the field but not a youngster. It is both exciting and
distressing to see how little consensus there is about a lot of fundamental
questions.
At the same time, we are going through an interesting period of new product
and componentry development, and of exploring and questioning socket and
suspension designs.

Perhaps because there are so many new ideas emerging it's not surprising that
there is a lack of consensus. Ideas need to be questioned and habit patterns
changed.

I think many times we can see that there are different ways to do things.
Functional vs optimal is an important question, however, it seems more
serious if some of us think shortening a knee disartic for componentry and
cosmesis, is preferable to preserving weight bearing surfaces and muscle
attachments. This is a topic that needs serious discussion. There are
numerous other questions as well, such as, should we be promoting more Ertl
and Gottschalk procedures with the surgeons?
I will soon post some of the other topics that people have suggested.

Membership in the Academy is optional. Perhaps additional funding should be
obtained from ABC and BOC and State Licensing fees. This might be the way to
demonstrate a committment to increasing the professionalism of prosthetists
across the board.

 I personally would welcome hearing how organizations outside the USA promote
meaningful research, increase the knowledge base of the practitioners,
establish and share prescription criteria

Sincerely,
Mark Benveniste CP
VA Med Ctr Houston TX