Re: practitoner standards

Re: practitoner standards

Levy, Charles

4/11/2003

This is a recurrent discussion.

The bottom line is as follows.

1) No specific certification gaurantees that every certified practitioner
is competent or ethical.

2) Likewise, lack of specific certification does not gaurantee that any
specific practitioner is incompetent or unethical.

3) Like it or not, high standard certification elevates a field, ultimately
improving the expertise of practitioners, and improving service to the
public.

Think about medicine: Are all surgeons good and competent? Probably not.
Would you trust your surgical care to someone who had not been trained as an
MD or DO and completed a surgical residency? Why are we willing to trust
prosthetic care to whomever wants to claim competence as a prosthetist?

The incursion of PT's and OT's into prosthetic and orthotic practice is only
possible because there are not established high level national professional
standards of what it means to be a prosthetist or orthotist. Can you
imagine PT's claiming that they have the right to practice medicine because
they define medicine as within their scope of practice? Of course not!
This is because there are very strict standards of what it means to be a
physician.

My 2 cents worth.

Charles E. Levy, MD

-----Original Message-----
From: Justin Foster [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 2:23 PM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] practitoner standards


Mr. Barr and list,

I certainly don't recommend that unqualified providers see patients.

I do believe there are many happy patients/clients out there who have been
fit, and cared for, by unqualified (only by virtue of their
credentials)providers. It would be great if credentials = qualification but
that is not always the case. I suggest we open our minds and shift the
working definition of UNQUALIFIED to those who do a bad job, whether they be
ABC, BOC, or from Joe's garage. Only then can we have true consumer
protection. I do not know this idea plays out in practice.

I am proud of my education, and I believe it has helped me to do a good job
every day, but I don't for one minute think that it is the only way to
achieve quality care in prosthetics and orthotics. Our services range in
necessary provider skill from amoeba to rocket scientist, and thusly there
should be a place for everyone!

Justin Foster
Prosthetic Resident





>From: Anthony T. Barr < <Email Address Redacted> >
>Reply-To: <Email Address Redacted>
>To: <Email Address Redacted>
>Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] practitoner standards
>Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 09:09:58 -0400
>
>It is the position like the below that has continued to encourage
>unqualified providers to practice in field of O&P.
>Whom is better determined to decide if the provider is able to perform
>quality work ?
>ABC, BOC, State Board of Health, the federal government ?
>Whom governs all other legitimate medical health providers ?


>----- Original Message -----
>From: Justin Foster < <Email Address Redacted> >
>To: < <Email Address Redacted> >
>Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 3:28 AM
>Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] practitoner standards
>
>
> > I think if the C.P. does quality work, in a state where there are no
>legal
> > barriers, then they should go for it! If we are really true to the
>patient
> > and have their best interest at heart, then the person who does the best
>job
> > should get the work, regardless of their credentials. That is my ethical
> > take on the subject, of course in certain states/jurisdictions a C.P.
>cannot
> > legally BILL for orthotic services. Maybe they can provide them for free
> > though??? Anyone know???
> >
> > Justin Foster
> > Prosthetic Resident


_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
<URL Redacted>