More on "APTA Comments on DMEPOS Quality Standards"
Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD)
Description
Collection
Title:
More on "APTA Comments on DMEPOS Quality Standards"
Creator:
Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD)
Date:
12/15/2005
Text:
More comments on the APTA letter -
Carol
_____
You walked right into this one.
In your response to Paul Oswald's concern regarding physical therapists claiming to be qualified to fabricate prostheses and orthoses, you describe exactly why Mr. Oswald and all of us in the O and P profession should be concerned about the official stance of the APTA. You state that PTs are licensed and knowledgeable about prosthetic and orthotic components, appropriate prescription, proper fit, fabrication, and training in control of the device. Then you suggest the dental model, where 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. Then the casting and measurements would be sent to the prosthetist/orthotist for fabrication of the initial device and the definitive prosthesis or orthosis, as the dentist would send the impression and measurements to the lab (???). The O&P professional could be very involved in the final stages, depending on logistics and agreements between the CPO and the PT. The PT would work with the patient, the O&P professional, and the physician in all - but especially the final - phases of fitting and delivery of the definitive device.
Well thank you, Carol, for including the O and P profession as the lab that fabricates the device for the physical therapists. And you wonder why many in the O and P profession are concerned about the direction the APTA is going in regards to orthotics and prosthetics. I am very happy that a license is required to practice orthotics and prosthetics in Washington State, and I hope more states implement licensing for O and P. We have, and will, continue to monitor the activities of the APTA in Washington. And, we are not being paranoid.
Carol
_____
You walked right into this one.
In your response to Paul Oswald's concern regarding physical therapists claiming to be qualified to fabricate prostheses and orthoses, you describe exactly why Mr. Oswald and all of us in the O and P profession should be concerned about the official stance of the APTA. You state that PTs are licensed and knowledgeable about prosthetic and orthotic components, appropriate prescription, proper fit, fabrication, and training in control of the device. Then you suggest the dental model, where 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. Then the casting and measurements would be sent to the prosthetist/orthotist for fabrication of the initial device and the definitive prosthesis or orthosis, as the dentist would send the impression and measurements to the lab (???). The O&P professional could be very involved in the final stages, depending on logistics and agreements between the CPO and the PT. The PT would work with the patient, the O&P professional, and the physician in all - but especially the final - phases of fitting and delivery of the definitive device.
Well thank you, Carol, for including the O and P profession as the lab that fabricates the device for the physical therapists. And you wonder why many in the O and P profession are concerned about the direction the APTA is going in regards to orthotics and prosthetics. I am very happy that a license is required to practice orthotics and prosthetics in Washington State, and I hope more states implement licensing for O and P. We have, and will, continue to monitor the activities of the APTA in Washington. And, we are not being paranoid.
Citation
Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD), “More on "APTA Comments on DMEPOS Quality Standards",” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 5, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/225860.
