Re: Bypassing Orthotists
Tony Barr
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: Bypassing Orthotists
Creator:
Tony Barr
Date:
2/13/2006
Text:
Carol A. Sheredos, PT, MA has made a good point in her post below regarding
the effectiveness of the newly formed O&P Alliance.
Licensure would most assuredly keep non-qualified persons [I call them the
riff-raff] out of the arena!
We used to have the same problem with L'Nard splints, but we managed to talk
our facility administrator into establishing a system to keep these
self-proclaimed brace specialists out of our facility, unless they were
called in by our Rehabilitation Dept. However, that was only on a facility
basis. The world is far larger than that... Without licensure, these types
will continue to be allowed to sell their wares directly to facilities and
to the public.
On another note, but also related to licensure, is the 2/9/06 news release
regarding the formation of an O&P alliance for government relations.
Unfortunately, there is a statement - paragraph 4 - that undermines the
whole effort: While coming together for the purposes of the Orthotic &
Prosthetic Alliance, ABC, the Academy, AOPA and NAAOP have all agreed to
stay true to their respective missions and advance their own agendas in
areas not related to the consensus goals of the larger group. - Too bad.
Until the O & P field can get it together regarding licensure, the
effectiveness of such alliances is predictably limited. If they can get
together for this, why not for licensure?
Don Joy is a AOPA member. Don Joy is also a NOMA member.EBI, Donjoy, Marquis
are also memebrs.
NOMA, whom as a group of several other manufactures, opposed regulation
efforts in several states across the country.
It fits that they are all have put items on patients using non-certified
orthotists.
Take your case of Don Joy and other manufacturer's encroachment to to the
Academy, provided you are a member, and to the attorney representing the
newly formed Orthotic and Prosthetic Alliance lobbyiest Peter w.Thomas whom
is also adminsitrator for the alliance.
As per Terry Supan.In Illinois, the O, P, & Ped Practice Act requires that
custom orthoses be provided by Licensed Orthotists or non licensed
individuals under the supervision of Licensed Orthotists. Billing for them
when they are provided in the State of Illinois by a non licensed individual
(or company), whether they reside in IL or not, is a violation of the Act
and and the Admin. Rules. If you know of such cases they need to be
reported to the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional
Regulation.
Perhaps the new O&P Alliance, made up of ABC,Academy,AOPA, and NAAOP can
reach first time consensus and support state and federal regulation of O&P,
as their first proirity and objective !
WHY NOT FOR LICENSURE ?
Until that time and in my and others opinion, this friction between industry
and profession will continue as will the desperately needed lack of
seperation of DME and comprhensive O&P what determines the differences.
Lets see how effective this NEW (?) alliance will be.
Can these groups put aside significant historical differences and work
together toward common goal?
WHY NOT FOR LICENSURE ?
Tony Barr
-----Original Message-----
From: Orthotics and Prosthetics List [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>] On
Behalf Of Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD)
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 12:53 PM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: [OANDP-L] Bypassing Orthotists
Joyce -
GREAT point! Now THAT is what we're talking about - Licensure would most
assuredly keep non-qualified persons [I call them the riff-raff] out of the
arena! We used to have the same problem with L'Nard splints, but we managed
to talk our facility administrator into establishing a system to keep these
self-proclaimed brace specialists out of our facility, unless they were
called in by our Rehabilitation Dept. However, that was only on a facility
basis. The world is far larger than that... Without licensure, these types
will continue to be allowed to sell their wares directly to facilities and
to the public.
On another note, but also related to licensure, is the 2/9/06 news release
regarding the formation of an O&P alliance for government relations.
Unfortunately, there is a statement - paragraph 4 - that undermines the
whole effort: While coming together for the purposes of the Orthotic &
Prosthetic Alliance, ABC, the Academy, AOPA and NAAOP have all agreed to
stay true to their respective missions and advance their own agendas in
areas not related to the consensus goals of the larger group. - Too bad.
Until the O & P field can get it together regarding licensure, the
effectiveness of such alliances is predictably limited. If they can get
together for this, why not for licensure?
Carol A. Sheredos, PT, MA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 07:56:04 -0500
From: Joyce Perrone < <Email Address Redacted> >
Subject: Bypassing Orthotists
EBI, Donjoy, Marquis -- all have put items on patients using non-certified
orthotists. This has been going on for a very long time. And not just
low-level devices (stock and bill) but more complex items, as well. Donjoy
in Pittsburgh has been great with working together with the orthotist
community, but I've not seen as great an effort Nationally. As long as they
can bill Medicare, and every other provider out there, I'm sure they will do
this.
My question to the group - WILL LICENSURE HELP THIS??? For those of you in
states that have licensure - has it helped you and HOW has it helped?? I
think it is important for everyone to have a clear understanding of this and
if it is of help, then to get on the bandwagon and pay to get licensure in
your state. We do not have it yet - and I am curious as what those of you
with it have experienced.
Joyce J Perrone
De La Torre O&P, Inc & PROMISE Consulting
300 Alpha Drive Pgh PA 15238
412-599-1112
the effectiveness of the newly formed O&P Alliance.
Licensure would most assuredly keep non-qualified persons [I call them the
riff-raff] out of the arena!
We used to have the same problem with L'Nard splints, but we managed to talk
our facility administrator into establishing a system to keep these
self-proclaimed brace specialists out of our facility, unless they were
called in by our Rehabilitation Dept. However, that was only on a facility
basis. The world is far larger than that... Without licensure, these types
will continue to be allowed to sell their wares directly to facilities and
to the public.
On another note, but also related to licensure, is the 2/9/06 news release
regarding the formation of an O&P alliance for government relations.
Unfortunately, there is a statement - paragraph 4 - that undermines the
whole effort: While coming together for the purposes of the Orthotic &
Prosthetic Alliance, ABC, the Academy, AOPA and NAAOP have all agreed to
stay true to their respective missions and advance their own agendas in
areas not related to the consensus goals of the larger group. - Too bad.
Until the O & P field can get it together regarding licensure, the
effectiveness of such alliances is predictably limited. If they can get
together for this, why not for licensure?
Don Joy is a AOPA member. Don Joy is also a NOMA member.EBI, Donjoy, Marquis
are also memebrs.
NOMA, whom as a group of several other manufactures, opposed regulation
efforts in several states across the country.
It fits that they are all have put items on patients using non-certified
orthotists.
Take your case of Don Joy and other manufacturer's encroachment to to the
Academy, provided you are a member, and to the attorney representing the
newly formed Orthotic and Prosthetic Alliance lobbyiest Peter w.Thomas whom
is also adminsitrator for the alliance.
As per Terry Supan.In Illinois, the O, P, & Ped Practice Act requires that
custom orthoses be provided by Licensed Orthotists or non licensed
individuals under the supervision of Licensed Orthotists. Billing for them
when they are provided in the State of Illinois by a non licensed individual
(or company), whether they reside in IL or not, is a violation of the Act
and and the Admin. Rules. If you know of such cases they need to be
reported to the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional
Regulation.
Perhaps the new O&P Alliance, made up of ABC,Academy,AOPA, and NAAOP can
reach first time consensus and support state and federal regulation of O&P,
as their first proirity and objective !
WHY NOT FOR LICENSURE ?
Until that time and in my and others opinion, this friction between industry
and profession will continue as will the desperately needed lack of
seperation of DME and comprhensive O&P what determines the differences.
Lets see how effective this NEW (?) alliance will be.
Can these groups put aside significant historical differences and work
together toward common goal?
WHY NOT FOR LICENSURE ?
Tony Barr
-----Original Message-----
From: Orthotics and Prosthetics List [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>] On
Behalf Of Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD)
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 12:53 PM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: [OANDP-L] Bypassing Orthotists
Joyce -
GREAT point! Now THAT is what we're talking about - Licensure would most
assuredly keep non-qualified persons [I call them the riff-raff] out of the
arena! We used to have the same problem with L'Nard splints, but we managed
to talk our facility administrator into establishing a system to keep these
self-proclaimed brace specialists out of our facility, unless they were
called in by our Rehabilitation Dept. However, that was only on a facility
basis. The world is far larger than that... Without licensure, these types
will continue to be allowed to sell their wares directly to facilities and
to the public.
On another note, but also related to licensure, is the 2/9/06 news release
regarding the formation of an O&P alliance for government relations.
Unfortunately, there is a statement - paragraph 4 - that undermines the
whole effort: While coming together for the purposes of the Orthotic &
Prosthetic Alliance, ABC, the Academy, AOPA and NAAOP have all agreed to
stay true to their respective missions and advance their own agendas in
areas not related to the consensus goals of the larger group. - Too bad.
Until the O & P field can get it together regarding licensure, the
effectiveness of such alliances is predictably limited. If they can get
together for this, why not for licensure?
Carol A. Sheredos, PT, MA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 07:56:04 -0500
From: Joyce Perrone < <Email Address Redacted> >
Subject: Bypassing Orthotists
EBI, Donjoy, Marquis -- all have put items on patients using non-certified
orthotists. This has been going on for a very long time. And not just
low-level devices (stock and bill) but more complex items, as well. Donjoy
in Pittsburgh has been great with working together with the orthotist
community, but I've not seen as great an effort Nationally. As long as they
can bill Medicare, and every other provider out there, I'm sure they will do
this.
My question to the group - WILL LICENSURE HELP THIS??? For those of you in
states that have licensure - has it helped you and HOW has it helped?? I
think it is important for everyone to have a clear understanding of this and
if it is of help, then to get on the bandwagon and pay to get licensure in
your state. We do not have it yet - and I am curious as what those of you
with it have experienced.
Joyce J Perrone
De La Torre O&P, Inc & PROMISE Consulting
300 Alpha Drive Pgh PA 15238
412-599-1112
Citation
Tony Barr, “Re: Bypassing Orthotists,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 2, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/226139.
