NPs and PAs Fight For Your Rights Now!!

[drgregory]

It is different state to state and that this one of the major problems in podiatry. Every state has different scopes, licensing requirements, ect. Personally, I'm not into big government, but this is one thing I would like to be universal. I am not an advocate for unlimited scope as some pods; I feel that the tibial tuberosity is the limit w/ the ability to collect grafts from the hip and buttocks.

There are two reasons I (in my opinion) this "not an issue." One pods can't agree on a scope, and two orthopods don't want a universal scope b/c then the "equal pay for equal work" issue would be bought back up.

welcome to the world of eyecare. same issues with optometry/ophthalmology. some cowboy ODs want to be major eye surgeons. some surgeons have the same views as you note the orthopods to have above - ODs increased scope would cut into their pocketbook. only difference with DPMs is that you are already adequately trained in surgery. ODs are not, and our education is on par with dentistry in terms of amount of systemic medicine/chronological time spent.
just a random, idiotic thought, but what if OD, DPM, DC, DDS degrees were abolished and all eye care, foot & ankle care, oral care, and spinal manipulation were to be left to MD authority after the last aging ODs, DPMs et al phase out? would this solve any problems? couldnt additional residency training/certification be administered?
probably another thread that is more appropriate for this. sorry.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Dr_Feelgood]

There has been a big push in the DPM community to move to MD/DO programs and eliminate either Foot and Ankle Orthopods or Podiatrist. There is a lack of interest in the F&A programs and many are going unfilled so more and more pods are going into a year long F&A residency after they are done w/ their 36 months of podiatric training.

As for my thoughts on the subject, I'm fifty/fifty. I'm proud of my profession but see how stream line and simple for everyone if all programs were MD/DO or just MD. But then you'll get a new area of medicine just like DO, DPM, OD, DC all branched off of MDs.

 

[drgregory]

As for my thoughts on the subject, I'm fifty/fifty. I'm proud of my profession but see how stream line and simple for everyone if all programs were MD/DO or just MD. But then you'll get a new area of medicine just like DO, DPM, OD, DC all branched off of MDs.

im in total agreement with you. i would imagine this would be a huge undertaking, but eventually certification would be very simple and there would be no overlapping of scope. i bet dental would hate this because medicare would jump in and afford some dental coverage (ie lower reimbursements than what dental is used to).

 

[LADoc00]

Sorry, but I agree with the bill. If you want to prescribe and perform complex procedures, go to med school.

NO SHIAT. hahahahahaha. Trained monkeys are more cost effective than MDs AND nurses, how bout giving them a shot!

 

[mcfaddens]

NO SHIAT. hahahahahaha. Trained monkeys are more cost effective than MDs AND nurses, how bout giving them a shot!

DITTO

 

[LADoc00]

DITTO

I swear Ive seen some monkey-like creatures on the wards in colorful scrubs, maybe my bill "Monkeys for affordable healthcare" passed. I hope this eases the primate job situation out, given that unemployment in jungle-based industries is up 50% these days.

Hell, if a monkey can get ants out of a stump with nothing but a stick, they can certainly operate!

Join us now: The monkey-nurse-doctor alliance. Healthcare is a TEAM effort.

 

[LADoc00]

OMG! That's SOOOOOOO funny! (not)

You be sure to ask for a trained monkey next time you're in the office, n'kay?


Also, since you're no longer in LA and in Ireland, what difference is it to you anyway?

nobody likes you, towlie.

Not more entertaining than a brown furry spider monkey dressed up like a Kaiser Permenante N.P., and you know what? Studies based on outcome analysis have shown the spider monkey is 2x more effective in reducing the number of sick days taken. Did you get my NEJM reprint on this yet??? Truly ground breaking...or I mean bananalicious.

 

[NufinButTheToof]

only difference with DPMs is that you are already adequately trained in surgery. ODs are not, and our education is on par with dentistry in terms of amount of systemic medicine/chronological time spent.

Maybe you can better inform me to the greater details of OD training, but I was under the impression that DDS had more overlap with MD training than OD did. Otherwise, how come DDS can get 2 year advance standing for the first two years of medical school when they apply to OMFS training?

I know that ODs have tried to lobby for this as well as a pathway to surgical eye care (ophthalmology). I highly doubt this will ever happen because the ophthalmologists have too strong a lobby, and this has always been their scope "surgery".

Dentists have always been involved in surgery (major developers of maxillofacial trauma and head&neck recon techniques during WWI and II)


DDS (doctor of dental "surgery")

OD (doctor of opto metry "eye measurement")




Sorry, after re-reading the post, I see now that you are a pod.. I thought you were stating that OD had the same amount of med and surg training as DDS.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Maybe you can better inform me to the greater details of OD training, but I was under the impression that DDS had more overlap with MD training than OD did. Otherwise, how come DDS can get 2 year advance standing for the first two years of medical school when they apply to OMFS training?

I know that ODs have tried to lobby for this as well as a pathway to surgical eye care (ophthalmology). I highly doubt this will ever happen because the ophthalmologists have too strong a lobby, and this has always been their scope "surgery".

Dentists have always been involved in surgery (major developers of maxillofacial trauma and head&neck recon techniques during WWI and II)


DDS (doctor of dental "surgery")

OD (doctor of opto metry "eye measurement")




Sorry, after re-reading the post, I see now that you are a pod.. I thought you were stating that OD had the same amount of med and surg training as DDS.

Actually, he is an OD. And from what I understand, the first 2 years of OD school are similar to the first 2 years of dental/med school. Depending on institution, ODs have been known to take the same classes as the dentists (UAB springs to mind). I would suggest that ODs know as much about ocular health as DDSs do about oral health.

Though I could be wrong since I've never been either.

 

[drgregory]

in most cases, OD training = DDS training during 1st two years

the arguement is why does a DDS become exempt from this legislation and OD doesnt.

even worse is that a DPM, who has a more extensive amount of training than either OD or DDS, is not exempt. riddle me this?

 

[NufinButTheToof]

in most cases, OD training = DDS training during 1st two years

Maybe.. but not across the board with all OD schools.

the arguement is why does a DDS become exempt from this legislation and OD doesnt.

Because DDS are trained in "surgery" and are able to admit patients.. ODs are not. Plain and simple.

even worse is that a DPM, who has a more extensive amount of training than either OD or DDS, is not exempt. riddle me this?

Again.. refer to the immediately above statement.. DDS are trained to surgically treat patients. Yes.. dental surgery is still surgery. also, it doesn't specify what type of DDS. (could be pedo, OMFS, etc) as well. All who routinely admit and treat patients in a hospital setting.

Having "more extensive training" ie.. residency etc for DPMs again as we've just stated is a relativly new thing, so maybe this will change for pods soon. who knows.

 

[sdn1977]

Are you kidding me..? I just dont want to be specific, ppl already know there are variation in drugs classificiation. Some cities in CA passing a law able to write Schedule 1 like marijuana for medicinal usage (But it's all about politics between feds/state/local). Basically, Schedule 1 is STRONGEST than any drugs and goes down to 5 etc.. like OTC, Tylenol, Motrin etc.. It has been this way long before you were borned--son. Remember those old days where doctors have to write in triplicate carbon copies. One goes to State/DEA drug controller, one goes to pt, and the other stays in the physician's binder. These are really strong medications, addictive, with vast side-effects. Most doctors these days prescrbing much lesser like 2 or 3 Vicodin, Tylenol w/Codine, Demoral etc.. (these mid-levels shouldn't touch). I once worked with ophthalmologist, ortho, they totally not renewing for certain schedules stronger drug than 3. Again, I believe the suitable physicians to prescribe all schedules ex) Pain Management Physicians, IMs with extensive fellowship, orthos, or surgeons after post-op but, for long-term Tx the pt should refer to a specialist to do further evalution work-up. BTW, in CA now all Physicians requires to complete a 12unit CME on Pain Mgmt excludes Radiologists and Pathologists.

I don't know who you are, but I've been a CA pharmacist for 30 years. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Tylenol & Motrin are not scheduled at all & neither are antibiotics, antneoplastics or antihypertensives.

The "Scheduled" drugs are only those who have addictive &/or abusive potential & there are NONE in Schedule I which are legally available for prescription. Mid levels who are authorized to write for Schedule II's & are acting within their scope of practice & under the supervision of their physician do so all the time and without harm.

Don't confuse the marijuana issue - it is political & is still classified as Schedule I.

You're also confused about the old triplicates....but, they are old news & nothing to get worked up about here. Those folks who have DEA #'s know exactly what they can write for & we know what we can fill for. They don't apply to the non-scheduled medications which actually are the bulk of available medications prescribed.

 

[drgregory]

Because DDS are trained in "surgery" and are able to admit patients.. ODs are not. Plain and simple.

so then the cognitive family physician is less of a physician than the cardiothoracic surgeon because the surgeon has more "surgical time" even if, lets say, they both went to Harvard Med School?

 

[Dr_Feelgood]

Having "more extensive training" ie.. residency etc for DPMs again as we've just stated is a relativly new thing, so maybe this will change for pods soon. who knows.

This is not true. Podiatric residencies have been around for a long time. But in the last 20 years they phased out the ability to practice w/o a post-grad training. Even before that pods were not allowed to perform many surgeries w/o a residency training.

 

[Dr_Feelgood]

I think we are getting off the original topic and into a penis measuring contest. What is important is all health professional disclose training and credentials. This bill does not address this; instead it gives the power to a group of 3 professions.

I feel the reason this bill ingored the a general disclosure is b/c it is already a law; making this law unneccessary. Let's enforce the laws we have and not create new ones.

Honestly, who should be making the decisions: state medical boards or John Sullivan, a small business owner and a U.S. Congressman? Who migh know a little more on the topic????

 

[FoughtFyr]

Honestly, who should be making the decisions: state medical boards or John Sullivan, a small business owner and a U.S. Congressman? Who migh know a little more on the topic????

Umm, given the powers vested to snake oil salesmen like DCs and NDs by many States' Boards of Medicine, I'm going to have to go with John Sullivan (but I agree with you that DDSs, ODs, and Pods should be "protected" by the bill).

- H

 

[Gentle_Touch]

I don't know who you are, but I've been a CA pharmacist for 30 years. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Tylenol & Motrin are not scheduled at all & neither are antibiotics, antneoplastics or antihypertensives.

The "Scheduled" drugs are only those who have addictive &/or abusive potential & there are NONE in Schedule I which are legally available for prescription. Mid levels who are authorized to write for Schedule II's & are acting within their scope of practice & under the supervision of their physician do so all the time and without harm.

Don't confuse the marijuana issue - it is political & is still classified as Schedule I.

You're also confused about the old triplicates....but, they are old news & nothing to get worked up about here. Those folks who have DEA #'s know exactly what they can write for & we know what we can fill for. They don't apply to the non-scheduled medications which actually are the bulk of available medications prescribed.

You can 30,000,000 years of experience work from Mars, Pluto, Moon or whatever still wouldn't make a difference. Let me tell you about any older professionals, they are most difficult to make learn new changes PERIOD. OTC is classifed, maybe you need to do more research or maybe all my textbooks gave me false information. I said nothing about ABx medications. BTW..when you guys trying to fill drugs that arent covers, please provide alternatives, we're busy treating pts...since you all day is verifying (pretty much nothing)..got that little Rx tech do all the work.

addendum:
I'm not a big fan for giving pts drugs for everything but avoid if possible.

 

[NufinButTheToof]

so then the cognitive family physician is less of a physician than the cardiothoracic surgeon because the surgeon has more "surgical time" even if, lets say, they both went to Harvard Med School?

No, because they are both doctors of medicine because they both completed medical school where they both learned the basics of both medicine and surgery. During post graduate training they decided to go diff paths, but they completed the basics together. so.. no. Nice try

comparing DDS vs OD

to

MD Family practice vs MD Cardiothoracic Surg

is not a fair comparison

 

[NufinButTheToof]

This is not true. Podiatric residencies have been around for a long time. But in the last 20 years they phased out the ability to practice w/o a post-grad training. Even before that pods were not allowed to perform many surgeries w/o a residency training.

I realise this, sorry for the misinterpretation. I ment that the "requirement" for the completion of post grad training is recent.

 

[NufinButTheToof]

Umm, given the powers vested to snake oil salesmen like DCs and NDs by many States' Boards of Medicine, I'm going to have to go with John Sullivan (but I agree with you that DDSs, ODs, and Pods should be "protected" by the bill).

- H

agreed

 

[drgregory]

agreed

at least we agree on something.

 

[Dr_Feelgood]

Umm, given the powers vested to snake oil salesmen like DCs and NDs by many States' Boards of Medicine, I'm going to have to go with John Sullivan (but I agree with you that DDSs, ODs, and Pods should be "protected" by the bill).

- H

But who gave them this power??? Medical boards must enforce state laws, again a politician changed the law forcing the hand of the board.

 

[jwk]

I think we are getting off the original topic and into a penis measuring contest. What is important is all health professional disclose training and credentials. This bill does not address this; instead it gives the power to a group of 3 professions.

I feel the reason this bill ingored the a general disclosure is b/c it is already a law; making this law unneccessary. Let's enforce the laws we have and not create new ones.

Honestly, who should be making the decisions: state medical boards or John Sullivan, a small business owner and a U.S. Congressman? Who migh know a little more on the topic????

You're right - way off topic - and 70+ messages into the thread, you still think the main gist of this bill is a slam at podiatrists.

 

[Dr_Feelgood]

You're right - way off topic - and 70+ messages into the thread, you still think the main gist of this bill is a slam at podiatrists.

I feel sorry for you. You must have a very pathetic life.

 

[jwk]

I feel sorry for you. You must have a very pathetic life.

What is it with you and the personal attacks? Are you not capable of having an adult discussion without resorting to them?

 

[Dr_Feelgood]

jwk, have you contributed to this topic??? Or are you here to insult DPMs, DCs, ODs?

You have off handed insults and then say why are you attacking me. I'm not going to play games if you want to insult me do it. Don't attack my profession, that is a passive aggressive and does not add anything to the topic. It seems that you are a on-line tough guy, and I bet you are just a wonderful boss. If you give respect to the other SDN members, I will give you respect. If not please, go away.

 

[jwk]

jwk, have you contributed to this topic??? Or are you here to insult DPMs, DCs, ODs?

You have off handed insults and then say why are you attacking me. I'm not going to play games if you want to insult me do it. Don't attack my profession, that is a passive aggressive and does not add anything to the topic. It seems that you are a on-line tough guy, and I bet you are just a wonderful boss. If you give respect to the other SDN members, I will give you respect. If not please, go away.

Let's see - post #1 had to do with a bill that the OP disagreed with. That's the main topic of the thread. My original response, post #3, discussed the intent of the bill, a viewpoint several others agreed with long before you joined the discussion. So yes, I have contributed to the ORIGINAL topic.

Somewhere along the line, you took offense and exception that podiatrists weren't included in the list of "doctors" cited in the bill. My opinion was, and is, that that was an oversight, not an intentional exclusive statement.

I have actually discussed this bill personally with a couple of it's congressional sponsors, and although the wording might not be perfected yet, the intent of the legislation is to prohibit those not TRADITIONALLY thought of as "doctors" from using that term. Yes, the AMA is firmly behind the bill, as are a number of the medical specialty societies, and their concern/intent largely revolves around nurses, physical therapists, and some other nursing and allied health professions who are making a move towards having "doctorate degrees" as their entry level for certification within their specialty (DNP for CRNA's, CNM's, and NP's, DPT for physical therapists, etc.) referring to themselves as "doctor" in a blatant attempt to mislead patients into thinking they are MD's. (notice I did not include podiatrists, dentists, or optometrists, nor were they mentioned on the "bad list").

You were the one who started taking the discussion down the road of qualifications of DPM's and others. As I've stated a couple of times, I have no problem at all with podiatrists being referred to as "doctor", and if this bill moves forward, should be amended/corrected to include DPM's on the "good list" within the bill.

I work with podiatrists on almost a daily basis in the OR, and have for many years. I have great respect for them and count them as personal friends. They don't work in ER's, they don't treat chronic illnesses, and they're not the ones that people are going to go to on an ongoing basis for anything except foot and ankle issues. I have no problem understanding that they may have been exposed to this during training, but once they have finished training, that's it, and I would guess that for the most part they wouldn't want anything to do with this other stuff anyway. I'm not attacking "your profession". You don't have to defend anything to me.

On the other hand, I'm not the one calling someone "ignorant" or telling them they make "ignorant statements". For some reason you take all this as a personal attack, which it was not on my part. You can't really say the same though when you call someone ignorant just because you disagree with their viewpoint.

And BTW, if you haven't noticed, you're posting in the "clinician" part of the forums, not the podiatry portion. The bill in question mainly deals with "clinicians".

 

[ptguy]

Just out of curiosity, If I have my doctorate of physical therapy or RN etc., do you feel it is misleading for me to introduce myself "Hi my name is Joe Blow and I'm a doctor of physical therapist" in a non hospital situation? For the record, thats not how I introduce myself but how would that be misleading and what harm could come of it?

 

[ptguy]

As I said, I dont introduce myself in this manner but reasons to potentially use this in my introduction:

-I have earned this degree.
-It could serve to identify that I have advanced training over other physical therapists

The same question could be asked of dentists, surgeons and physicians.

 

[ProZackMI]

Sorry, but I agree with the bill. If you want to prescribe and perform complex procedures, go to med school.

 

[ptguy]

Megaboo,

Correct me if I am wrong, but the Doctor title can mean a number of things:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title)
and that you can be a doctor of medicine, doctor of dental surgery etc.
As such, the use of doctor does not help to clarify your job, even in the hospital where there are multiple types of physicians who perform many roles.

 

[NufinButTheToof]

dentists, surgeons, and physicians introduce themselves as such because that is their job title. I work with many PTs but they introduce themselves as a physical therapist. It doesn't matter to the patient that you're a DPT or have a Master's. You'll still do the same job.

"The entry-level doctor of physical therapy program (DPT) is designed for individuals who have no previous degree in physical therapy and wish to pursue a doctor of physical therapy degree and professional certification."

http://www.llu.edu/llu/sahp/pt/dptentry.html?PHPSESSID=#HPRO+531

Some people actually have a BPT or bachelors of Physical therapy which is also the same thing. (an entry level degree for Physical Therapy)

like this guy http://www.stpetes.org/html/physmedbios/bio_Korey.html

In the end.. your job and scope of practice are the same (physical therapist) regardless of which degree you have.

http://physicaltherapy.about.com/od/careersinphysicaltherapy/p/PTDegrees.htm

 

[jwk]

In the end.. your job and scope of practice are the same (physical therapist) regardless of which degree you have.

Same for CRNA's, NP's, CNM's, etc. The "doctorate" types of these providers, including PT's, MAY have more knowledge (and maybe not), but there scope of practce will be unchanged. That is determined by state law.

 

[lawguil]

As I said, I dont introduce myself in this manner but reasons to potentially use this in my introduction:

-I have earned this degree.
-It could serve to identify that I have advanced training over other physical therapists

The same question could be asked of dentists, surgeons and physicians.

But you don't have advanced training over other physical therapists...it's still entry level......the difference b/t a BSPT vs an MSPT vs. a DPT is nothing, except the price......

Also, when you say you're Dr. Physical therapist, it is misleading because many may assume that a physical therapist is a type of physician specialist......

 

[FoughtFyr]

Megaboo,

Correct me if I am wrong, but the Doctor title can mean a number of things:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title)
and that you can be a doctor of medicine, doctor of dental surgery etc.
As such, the use of doctor does not help to clarify your job, even in the hospital where there are multiple types of physicians who perform many roles.

Let's keep it simple, because ill, hospitalized people don't often go for nuance. If a 5 year-old child states "I wanna be a doctor when I go up", do you assume they mean a. A Ph.D. research scientist, b. A DPT, c. A CAM provider or d. An MD/DO workng as a physician?

Come on, the common cultural convention in the U.S. is that, in a healthcare setting, the title "Doctor" means MD/DO. This bill is an attempt to prevent unethical providers from turning that point of cultural ignorance into a marketing point by exploiting the technically true statement that the provider is a "doctor" in a manner that intones a different meaning.

Come on, didn't we all get over the chuckles when we learned the word "gay" used to be taken to mean "joyous and happy" in 3rd grade? Are you telling me that if someone suggested you were gay you would take that to be their meaning?

- H

 

[prairiedog]

This bill is an attempt to prevent unethical providers from turning that point of cultural ignorance into a marketing point by exploiting the technically true statement that the provider is a "doctor" in a manner that intones a different meaning.

- H

Please provide any reference to support your statement. One reference that notes the number of unethical providers who want to be known as MDs? I do know that nurses have been rated the most trustworthy professional for several years, the pharmacy professional is second. The American Public considers the MD less ethical when compared to either. Do you really think unethical behavior is the tenet of the bill? I suspect that the AMA motive is $$$$$$, so tell me more about cultural ignorance.

 

[deleted6669]

Please provide any reference to support your statement. One reference that notes the number of unethical providers who want to be known as MDs? I do know that nurses have been rated the most trustworthy professional for several years, the pharmacy professional is second. The American Public considers the MD less ethical when compared to either. Do you really think unethical behavior is the tenet of the bill? I suspect that the AMA motive is $$$$$$, so tell me more about cultural ignorance.

are you saying that to the best of your knowledge EVERY doctorate level np introduces themselves this way to a new patient; " hi I'm dr smith, one of the nurse practitioners"...which wouldn't be so bad...the problem is the same np saying "hi, I'm dr smith."

 

[FoughtFyr]

Please provide any reference to support your statement. One reference that notes the number of unethical providers who want to be known as MDs? I do know that nurses have been rated the most trustworthy professional for several years, the pharmacy professional is second. The American Public considers the MD less ethical when compared to either. Do you really think unethical behavior is the tenet of the bill? I suspect that the AMA motive is $$$$$$, so tell me more about cultural ignorance.

"Want to be known as MDs"? That is not the point. No one is saying that they are claiming to be MDs. But, if a DNP comes into a patient's room in the hospital and introduces him/herself as "Dr. Smith", what degree do you believe the patient thinks they hold? Look, the intent of the bill is not scope of practice, it is ethical marketing. Why do you have such a problem introducing yourself as a nurse practitioner? Why is it a problem to make clear to the patient who they are seeing? What exactly are you trying to hide? Look, I am not suggesting that, in proper company, a doctorate of anything isn't formally addressed as doctor, but that a problem in settings where that might mean something else. Here is another example, in the 1950s there was a precursor to JROTC called the "National Defense Cadet Corps", if a high schooler achieved the rank of Colonel in the NDCC, they were entitled to wear the insignia on their uniform. The exception, clearly written into the code of conduct was "upon visiting a military facility, active or decommissioned, of the United States or it's allies". This is the same thing. No one is saying that a DNP or a Pharm D is not a doctor. what we are saying is that, in healthcare, the term "doctor" does not connote academic achievement, but is rather a job title (in fact, physicians trained in Britain or the Commonwealth obtain the MBBS degree - not a doctorate, but are still referred to in an American Hospital as "doctor".)

And if you don't think there are midlevel s and CAM providers out there vastly overstating their qualifications, then you are a fool (or you are one of them and you don't like this bill because it will require you to stop).

BTW - this isn't an AMA bill. Most members of the AMA are so old and out of touch they don't see this as a problem.

- H

 

[rn29306]

Come on, didn't we all get over the chuckles when we learned the word "gay" used to be taken to mean "joyous and happy" in 3rd grade? Are you telling me that if someone suggested you were gay you would take that to be their meaning?

- H

That is about the most hilarious statement I have heard on this board as of this year. Well delivered too, as the point of the statement was not lost in the humor.

Thanks for the laugh.

 

[lawguil]

Please provide any reference to support your statement. One reference that notes the number of unethical providers who want to be known as MDs? I do know that nurses have been rated the most trustworthy professional for several years, the pharmacy professional is second. The American Public considers the MD less ethical when compared to either. Do you really think unethical behavior is the tenet of the bill? I suspect that the AMA motive is $$$$$$, so tell me more about cultural ignorance.

Did you read his post? WOW. I refer you to the Physical Therapy Association and the Nursing association, and the Pharmacy association. They have all decided to move towards "entry level" "doctorate" degrees....not because the training or education have changed, but on many levels, to take advantage of the general publics ignorance and the marketing appeal. "Doctor sales are very hot right now...especially to unsuspecting students who may be interested in careers that award a "doctorate" (more and more moms are so proud of their doctoring children.) Know body is directly accusing non-physician clinicians of wanting to be known as MD's. It's simply confusing to everybody! Know body needs to waste money on a study to understand that when the word doctor is used, people think of physicians.

Also, thanks for the better understanding of the American public opinion. The science of opinion is unquestionable.

 

[ptguy]

If the concern is confusion, why dont physicians and surgeons move to calling themselves their protected names ie. medical doctor, physician, surgeon etc? I dont disagree with hospital introductions being confusing but I can gaurantee sick patients are equally confused by the different medical doctors they see in hospital. I live in a commonwealth country and may be why my take on this is a little different.

I would be interested to know how physicians became known as Doctors - my guess is that in older days a physician would be one of a couple of educated people in smaller towns and were called Dr. as a term of respect for their knowledge level.

Lawguil, the move towards DPT has been made for a couple of reasons including creeping credentials but there is also a move towards providing direct access care in the outpatient setting and providing physical therapists with the education to do this safely.

 

[lawguil]

Lawguil, the move towards DPT has been made for a couple of reasons including creeping credentials but there is also a move towards providing direct access care in the outpatient setting and providing physical therapists with the education to do this safely.

Inflating the degree and adding a course in pharmachology and diff. dx doesn't make a physical therapist qualified for direct access. Being trained in the medical model of education as opposed to movement sciences does. If you've never had the clinical education to identify non-NMS conditions, how can you be safe for direct access? The curriculum that exists in the DPT could easily be applied to a bachelors program. Instead the APTA, as crafty as they are, identified a market tool called the "clinical doctorate" that seems to have a decent track record for advancing professions. The physical therapist is a type of non-physician specialist......not an expert primary care practitioner.

 

[ptguy]

Actually Lawguil, I believe that physical therapists have direct access in (?) 47 states and long standing direct access in commonwealth contries so apparently the powers that be disagree with you.

 

[lawguil]

Actually Lawguil, I believe that physical therapists have direct access in (?) 47 states and long standing direct access in commonwealth contries so apparently the powers that be disagree with you.

I'm aware of the "direct access" that exists in most states. They certainly do dissagree with me and the medicare advisory commission.

http://www.medpac.gov/publications/c...4_PTaccess.pdf


MedPAC supports the continued supervision of physical therapy by physicians, as discussed in a December 30, 2004 study on “the feasibility and advisability of allowing Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries to have “direct access” to outpatient physical therapy (PT) services and comprehensive rehabilitation facility services.” The report determined that physician supervision and referral remain in the best interest of Medicare beneficiaries.

 

[Dr_Feelgood]

I work with podiatrists on almost a daily basis in the OR, and have for many years. I have great respect for them and count them as personal friends. They don't work in ER's, they don't treat chronic illnesses, and they're not the ones that people are going to go to on an ongoing basis for anything except foot and ankle issues. I have no problem understanding that they may have been exposed to this during training, but once they have finished training, that's it, and I would guess that for the most part they wouldn't want anything to do with this other stuff anyway. I'm not attacking "your profession". You don't have to defend anything to me.

Do you know what the definition of ignorance is??? It is a lack of knowledge on a subject. Were you comments ignorant??? Yes, you speak as if you are an expert on podiatry. Are you? Or are you making ignorant statements?

1) Just b/c you work w/ pods doesn't mean you know about the profession
2) I continue to tell you that pods do treat chronic illnesses, peripheral neuropathy, PAD, skin disorders, those all extend outside of the foot and ankle
3) I have work in the ER w/ licensed podiatrist and we have been offered to take call

If you are not attacking my profession, than why would you state a false opinion? If I said anesthesia assistants general have no real training when compared to anesthesiologists would that be an attack your profession?

 

[jwk]

Do you know what the definition of ignorance is??? It is a lack of knowledge on a subject. Were you comments ignorant??? Yes, you speak as if you are an expert on podiatry. Are you? Or are you making ignorant statements?

1) Just b/c you work w/ pods doesn't mean you know about the profession
2) I continue to tell you that pods do treat chronic illnesses, peripheral neuropathy, PAD, skin disorders, those all extend outside of the foot and ankle
3) I have work in the ER w/ licensed podiatrist and we have been offered to take call

If you are not attacking my profession, than why would you state a false opinion? If I said anesthesia assistants general have no real training when compared to anesthesiologists would that be an attack your profession?

I'm over the pods discussion - it's pointless to debate with you.

Try the original topic again.

 

[ptguy]

lawguil,

Sorry to hear you feel that way - I'm sure you wont change your point of view based on anything I present you but I would question if this is based on fact or opinion.

 

[jwk]

Do you know what the definition of ignorance is??? It is a lack of knowledge on a subject. Were you comments ignorant??? Yes, you speak as if you are an expert on podiatry. Are you? Or are you making ignorant statements?

1) Just b/c you work w/ pods doesn't mean you know about the profession
2) I continue to tell you that pods do treat chronic illnesses, peripheral neuropathy, PAD, skin disorders, those all extend outside of the foot and ankle
3) I have work in the ER w/ licensed podiatrist and we have been offered to take call

If you are not attacking my profession, than why would you state a false opinion? If I said anesthesia assistants general have no real training when compared to anesthesiologists would that be an attack your profession?

Oh - one last question? Why aren't you pursuing this topic in the podiatry forum?

 

[DNP student]

Did you read his post? WOW. I refer you to the Physical Therapy Association and the Nursing association, and the Pharmacy association. They have all decided to move towards "entry level" "doctorate" degrees....not because the training or education have changed, but on many levels, to take advantage of the general publics ignorance and the marketing appeal. "Doctor sales are very hot right now...especially to unsuspecting students who may be interested in careers that award a "doctorate" (more and more moms are so proud of their doctoring children.) Know body is directly accusing non-physician clinicians of wanting to be known as MD's. It's simply confusing to everybody! Know body needs to waste money on a study to understand that when the word doctor is used, people think of physicians.

I can't speak for other professions, but I would greatly disagree with the impetus for the DNP. It is not a political move, but more a logistical one. We need more doctorates in order to increase nursing school enrollment. Most of the students in my class are faculty members of a school of nursing. Yes, there are some that work strictly as NP's, and one or two that just want the title "doctor." However, there will always be some in every profession that want to be something they are not. However, that was not the reason for starting the program. Contrary to popular belief, most nurses do not want to be physicians, and don't want people to think they are physicians. there are only a few.

 

[DNP student]

Come on, didn't we all get over the chuckles when we learned the word "gay" used to be taken to mean "joyous and happy" in 3rd grade? Are you telling me that if someone suggested you were gay you would take that to be their meaning?- H

You kids are making me feel old. The word "gay" stll meant joyful when I was in college.