Re: New PT Legislation
Morris Gallo
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: New PT Legislation
Creator:
Morris Gallo
Date:
3/4/2000
Text:
Mr. Griffin
Unfortunately it is you who is incorrect. If a PT is in a P&O non-licensed
state (any of the 46) and chooses to do P&O there is nothing to prevent it short
of a specific prohibition in their state's license law. Because P&O is not
licensed anyone can practice, not just folks who don't have a PT or OT license.
The effect of the model practice act is to legitimize PT's to do P&O even
though they have received no specialized education or training in P&O.
In today's mangled care arena and with capped Medicare payments many allied
health practitioners are desperately seeking new areas which they might claim as
profit centers. Vertical integration is the obvious easy answer. PT's already
have the patients for therapy and have a pipeline to the prescribing physician,
why refer them to P&O practitioners when the PT can do the work and reap the
rewards. This is similar to the ortho or neuro physician who has his own
X-ray/MRI/PT /Lab and refers all his patients to his own facility. Medicare
would probably not consider it as a self-referral if the PT is licensed to do
both PT and O&P.
Todd Griffin wrote:
> Tony Barr wrote:
>
> I personally would feel a whole lot better knowing my child was being
> evaluated and treated by a O&P licensed professional for a brace or orthosis
> for treatment of scoliosis, polio,or a prosthesis for an amputee than by
> anyone who can hang out a O&P shingle. The insurance provider would feel a
> alot more comfortable in providing coverage!
>
> If physical therapists are worthy of regulation and the status of health
> care professional than so should be O&P providers, unless they feel the
> services they provide are not worthy of a professional license. Fortunately
> most want to be regulated and patients deserve better protection than
> caveat emptor.
>
> Congratulations, Mr. Barr, you completely missed my point. I was saying
> that you don't have to worry about the PT's hanging out an O&P shingle.
> They are required, by law, to ONLY hang out a PT shingle!! If the state
> board for PT's found out a therapist was fitting prosthetic limbs for
> amputees they would probably lose their license, because it is not within
> the true scope of their practice!
>
> Obviously your sole focus here is licensure for O&P, and I am in total
> agreement with you on that. Athletic trainers started that same battle
> about 15-20 years ago, and there are still some states with no state
> licensure. However, don't try to overstep your bounds in doing so by trying
> to stake sole claim to some of the aspects of your profession that overlap
> into the scope of practice of other health care professions!
>
> Todd Griffin MS, ATC
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at <URL Redacted>
>
>
Unfortunately it is you who is incorrect. If a PT is in a P&O non-licensed
state (any of the 46) and chooses to do P&O there is nothing to prevent it short
of a specific prohibition in their state's license law. Because P&O is not
licensed anyone can practice, not just folks who don't have a PT or OT license.
The effect of the model practice act is to legitimize PT's to do P&O even
though they have received no specialized education or training in P&O.
In today's mangled care arena and with capped Medicare payments many allied
health practitioners are desperately seeking new areas which they might claim as
profit centers. Vertical integration is the obvious easy answer. PT's already
have the patients for therapy and have a pipeline to the prescribing physician,
why refer them to P&O practitioners when the PT can do the work and reap the
rewards. This is similar to the ortho or neuro physician who has his own
X-ray/MRI/PT /Lab and refers all his patients to his own facility. Medicare
would probably not consider it as a self-referral if the PT is licensed to do
both PT and O&P.
Todd Griffin wrote:
> Tony Barr wrote:
>
> I personally would feel a whole lot better knowing my child was being
> evaluated and treated by a O&P licensed professional for a brace or orthosis
> for treatment of scoliosis, polio,or a prosthesis for an amputee than by
> anyone who can hang out a O&P shingle. The insurance provider would feel a
> alot more comfortable in providing coverage!
>
> If physical therapists are worthy of regulation and the status of health
> care professional than so should be O&P providers, unless they feel the
> services they provide are not worthy of a professional license. Fortunately
> most want to be regulated and patients deserve better protection than
> caveat emptor.
>
> Congratulations, Mr. Barr, you completely missed my point. I was saying
> that you don't have to worry about the PT's hanging out an O&P shingle.
> They are required, by law, to ONLY hang out a PT shingle!! If the state
> board for PT's found out a therapist was fitting prosthetic limbs for
> amputees they would probably lose their license, because it is not within
> the true scope of their practice!
>
> Obviously your sole focus here is licensure for O&P, and I am in total
> agreement with you on that. Athletic trainers started that same battle
> about 15-20 years ago, and there are still some states with no state
> licensure. However, don't try to overstep your bounds in doing so by trying
> to stake sole claim to some of the aspects of your profession that overlap
> into the scope of practice of other health care professions!
>
> Todd Griffin MS, ATC
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at <URL Redacted>
>
>
Citation
Morris Gallo, “Re: New PT Legislation,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 5, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/213874.
