Re: APTA Comments on DMEPOS Quality Standards

Re: APTA Comments on DMEPOS Quality Standards

Tony Barr

12/8/2005

I echo Terry Supan comments regarding Dr. Fishman's philosphy regarding
models. He was a believer in formal higher education and licensure to
better safe guard the patient.

I also remind the director Director O&P Program at OSU-Okmulgee Paul Oswald
CPO, and everyone to his comments below,that in 40 states there is no
accountability or standards of O&P providers regardless of whether the
provider has a certification or not..

All 39 ( just California requires ABC/BOC certification for MediCal
reimbursement),other wise anyone can provide O&P services without regard to
qualification,criminal background checks,etc.

Stop the new Alpha bet soup war with PTs and OT and get busy cleaning up
your own profession and get united not divided.

At least all PTS have a state license to loose, can be fined or serve time
if they defraud or provide less than adequte services.

You want to regarded as a legitimate O&P provider ? than get a state license
like every other credable health care provider.

Tony Barr

-----Original Message-----
From: Orthotics and Prosthetics List [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>] On
Behalf Of Terry Supan
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 11:14 AM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] APTA Comments on DMEPOS Quality Standards

Ms. Sheredos,

I can assure you that if Dr. Fishman advocated the dental model
earlier in his tenure at NYU it was NOT his sentiment in the last years of
his life. Dr Fishman was a personal friend of mine and as one of his last
official functions I had the distinction of serving on the Negotiated
Rulemaking Committee with him. He was one of the representatives of the
AAOS and I was there representing O&P State Licensure Boards.

The APTA's opinion at the NRM that licensed physical therapist would equate
a qualified O&P provider was not shared by Dr. Fishman. Several times he
repeated that the amount of education that a therapist receives on O&P at
any PT program would expose the student to the theory of O&P but was never
enough for them to be trained in the design, fabrication, fitting and even
the assessment of the present day custom orthosis or prosthesis.

In my official opinion, the APTA's letter does not adequately present the
outcome of the NRM. The APTA's unwillingness to compromise on the fact that
a therapist needed more education and training to be qualified was the
demise of the consensus. A national maximum of 6 credit hours in O&P theory
does not equal a minimum of 60 credit hours for a fully CAAHEP accredited
O&P program. That was what caused the failure of the committee to come to
an agreement. The ruling that CMS has come up with reflects the majority of
the committee members including the physicians and consumer members of the
committee.

Because of the lack of compromise on the part of the APTA, we never got to
the discussion on what the educational of an orthotist or prosthetist must
be. That was very unfortunate because as most of us know, Dr.
Fishman created the first under graduate program in O&P and in his later
years was a very vocal advocate of post graduate program for my profession.

Terry Supan, CPO, FAAOP, FISPO

Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD) wrote:

>In my unofficial response to Paul Oswald's comments concerning the APTA
statement to CMS regarding PT qualifications ...
>
>The late Sidney Fishman, Ph.D., had a very workable solution to all of this
-- The dental model. The PT would measure and take a cast of the residual or
affected limb, as a dentist would take an impression of the mouth/teeth to
be fitted. The casting and measurements would be sent to the
prosthetist/orthotist for fabrication of the ...
>
>-- Carol A. Sheredos, PT, MA
>
>
>