Prefix Dr for PT

[jino76]

Hi ,
PTs from all countries !!
I just want to know If you are eligible to prefix Dr infont of your name in your country/laws etc?
I know this is a sensational topic 😉
Thanks

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[MCWills]

If you went to school and received a Doctor of PT then yes. If you only have a masters or bachelors then no.

 

[DesertPT]

If you have a DPT, technically yes you could refer to yourself as Dr. So-and-so. I have yet to see a PT do this and I'm sure the majority would advise you against it.

 

[BiffTheFlashRogers]

If you have a DPT, technically yes you could refer to yourself as Dr. So-and-so. I have yet to see a PT do this and I the majority would advise you against it.

Overall, I agree and lean towards not going by "Doctor BiffTheFlashRogers" once I get my DPT. A ton of great clinicians are currently practicing without the DPT and it could be awkward to have new PTs coming up going by Dr while many of the vets don't and can't. Plus, the profession has worked hard to form a close relationship with patients. All of the PTs I know are on a first name basis with all of their patients.

On the other hand, we want to move the profession forward and increase the value of the shift to the DPT. I think one can argue that not acknowledging that we ARE 'Doctors' may hold is back. After all, don't we want to increase the awareness of how awesome PTs are in order to make us the practitioners of choice a la vision 2020? As a runner, I have gotten to know my sportsmed Ciropractor very well over the years. He goes by Dr. Nick when introducing himself and after that it's all first name only. I think that strikes a good balance.

 

[DesertPT]

This and other things like it have been debated a number of times here on the forums, so if you're interested in further reading a search of the PT forums should do it.

 

[NewTestament]

Hi ,
PTs from all countries !!
I just want to know If you are eligible to prefix Dr infont of your name in your country/laws etc?
I know this is a sensational topic 😉
Thanks

I think you mean 'sensitive' but in any case, most physical therapists lack the pretense to call themselves "doctor." We're eligible, yes, but we still don't. We're casual and comfortable with our patients, and that's the way it should be. I don't want PT's to call themselves 'doctor' and wear a white lab coat. What message does that send?

 

[jblil]

I don't want PT's to call themselves 'doctor' and wear a white lab coat.

Especially if they went to a 2-yr online program.

Sorry, I couldn't resist poking at it.

 

[DesertPT]

We're casual and comfortable with our patients, and that's the way it should be. I don't want PT's to call themselves 'doctor' and wear a white lab coat. What message does that send?

Exactly. One of the biggest thing that attracted me to PT was the way that most PTs are able to be great at what they do without having any arrogance or ego about it. In general it seems like there aren't a lot of snobs or stiffs in PT and so I don't think PTs asking to be called Dr. NewTestament, etc. will really catch on.

 

[PTMattI]

At the same time, we do have to move our profession forward as @BiffTheFlashRogers pointed out. Chiropractors called themselves doctors all the time. We are the most educated when it comes to MSK disorders yet we garner the least amount of respect when it comes to reimbursement / direct access.

 

[DesertPT]

We are the most educated when it comes to MSK disorders yet we garner the least amount of respect

I think this is part of the reason why PT doesn't attract a lot of ego-maniacs.

 

[PTMattI]

@DesertPT , your point is lost on me. Please explain?

 

[AlanWattsBlues]

In a clinical setting it creates an opportunity for confusion with patients, and you risk looking ridiculous to other healthcare professionals. But whatever you do, never describe yourself as "Dr. Whoever, DPT". It's redundant, and looks like you're trying WAY too hard.

From the perspective of a student who interacts with clinicians/professors, it seems that the best ones care little about their titles. Though the mediocre ones are quick to talk about how rigorous their transitional DPT was, or to constantly allude to their PhD (from somewhere for something, who knows).

 

[NewTestament]

There's no room for pretentious or conceited people in physical therapy. Let's keep it that way. I know many physicians still insist on being referred to as 'doctor.' 🙄Hopefully the younger generation doesn't feel the same, because no way am I going to refer to a physician who's my age as 'doctor.'

 

[jamcat]

There's no room for pretentious or conceited people in physical therapy. Let's keep it that way. I know many physicians still insist on being referred to as 'doctor.' 🙄Hopefully the younger generation doesn't feel the same, because no way am I going to refer to a physician who's my age as 'doctor.'

I'm going to be a (physician) doctor and was just poking around SDN visiting other SDN threads for the first time. Maybe I can offer a bit of a different perspective here. Some people would like the title "doctor" to be used not because they're arrogant, but because it creates a more distant, professional atmosphere, which is desirable in this age where lawsuits are flying and one (false) allegation can really mean the end to your career. Atul Gawande discussed this in one of his books; he mentioned doctors who, aside from being called "doctor," always wore the white coat, and always wore gloves when examining patients even when gloves weren't strictly called for. Absolutely nothing to do with conceit in this case; all to do with maintaining a professional distance that has actually been shown to reduce lawsuits.

Kind of like in the West Wing when President Bartlet is in the oval office talking to the priest he's known since he was a kid. The priest asks whether to call him Jed or Mr. President, and he replies that he prefers Mr. President in that office, not out of arrogance, but because he needs to be the President at that point, not Jed.

In the same vein, when your doctor's doing a pelvic or genital exam on you, you want them to be Dr. Doe, not next-door neighbor Jane. Did you know that this is also why judges wear the black gown? It's supposed to de-individualize them; when they're wearing the gown they're representing law and society, not themselves. The traditions behind these formalisms are interesting.

So please don't think that every physician who introduces him/herself as "Dr. Doe" is "pretentious or conceited," as you put it. Not only is it just tradition so it's kind of the default, but there are very legitimate reasons for maintaining a professional distance other than arrogance.

Okay, now back to the DPT discussion. 🙂

 

[DesertPT]

@DesertPT , your point is lost on me. Please explain?

I mean to say that the prestige that comes with the title "Dr." is not what motivates people to go into therapy.

 

[DesertPT]

There's no room for pretentious or conceited people in physical therapy. Let's keep it that way. I know many physicians still insist on being referred to as 'doctor.' 🙄Hopefully the younger generation doesn't feel the same, because no way am I going to refer to a physician who's my age as 'doctor.'

I agree that we don't need pretentious PTs, however I don't mind calling physicians doctors as that is more of a job title than anything. Referring to their doctors by their first name would be highly unusual for the majority of the population.

 

[NewTestament]

I agree that we don't need pretentious PTs, however I don't mind calling physicians doctors as that is more of a job title than anything. Referring to their doctors by their first name would be highly unusual for the majority of the population.

So if you're a PT and you work with a physician, would you routinely refer to him as "Dr. So and So?" I find that awkward, especially if he calls me by my first name. Maybe I'm too egalitarian and libertarian for that. I can understand why patients should refer to their physician as "doctor," but not co-workers.

 

[emespt]

I believe that PTs should at least introduce themselves as Dr. So-and-so and then after that point they can go by first name basis. PTs work hard to receive their DPT and since we are at that critical period where they are trying to gain more rights for direct access, they should express their credentials to their patients. Nothing about being egotistical.

Introducing themselves as doctors is the first step to being recognized by the public as professionals who do more than just "massages and stretching."

And as a response to NewTestament, if it is a casual conversation with the physician, it is ok to drop the doctor. However, in front of patients, then the prefix should be used out of respect and professionalism, especially if the physician prefers to be called doctor by their patients.

 

[jamcat]

So if you're a PT and you work with a physician, would you routinely refer to him as "Dr. So and So?" I find that awkward, especially if he calls me by my first name. Maybe I'm too egalitarian and libertarian for that. I can understand why patients should refer to their physician as "doctor," but not co-workers.

I didn't realize you were talking about physician co-workers; I thought you were talking about using the title "Dr."

But I think this varies by region of the country too. In some places, everyone is more formal and co-workers refer to each other by Title. Last Name. I've worked in places where it would be highly inappropriate for anyone to call anyone by their first name, regardless of what training, if any, they had. I've worked in other places where everyone goes by first names, regardless of training. So I feel as though that's more location dependent than training-dependent.

If you're talking about a situation where somebody would request to be called "Dr. Smith" and then proceed to call you, a co-worker, "Joe," I agree that would be highly annoying and unnecessary and would totally rub me the wrong way.

 

[PTMattI]

I mean to say that the prestige that comes with the title "Dr." is not what motivates people to go into therapy.

I would agree, I think the majority of us entered this profession because we enjoy helping people. It definitely wasnt for the money either haha

I just think that in order to advance the profession, we have to somehow convey the message to others that (as someone else already pointed out) we do much much more than give massages and prescribe stretches. Obviously the cornerstone of this will be quality patient care, but I think a part of it should include referring to ourselves as Dr. (at least on the very first patient encounter, and on our business cards, advertising, etc...)

 

[sss_pt]

This is a tough subject and can very easily be skewed to an "us" vs "them" outlook. This is dangerous and in my humble opinion, should be avoided. Instead, everyone should focus on the importance of the healthcare providing spectrum understanding that PT's are ethical, knowledgeable, and capable of functioning as first-line providers. I believe PT's are willing to diagnose and treat within a professional scope, and with full understanding of what is out of bounds. I also believe this touches on why most people have described PT's as "not pretentious", it's simply because they know while they may be experts at certain things, there comes a point where problems must be passed to a physician. The key is eliminating a big brother little brother mentality, and replacing it with mutual respect and functionality, resulting in timely end effective health care. Call me naive, but this seems to be a solid route to take.

 

[noyceguy]

So if you're a PT and you work with a physician, would you routinely refer to him as "Dr. So and So?" I find that awkward, especially if he calls me by my first name. Maybe I'm too egalitarian and libertarian for that. I can understand why patients should refer to their physician as "doctor," but not co-workers.

I work in an office with about 8 physicians. I called them Dr. So-and-so and they call me by my first name.

 

[Fiveoboy11]

This is a tough subject and can very easily be skewed to an "us" vs "them" outlook. This is dangerous and in my humble opinion, should be avoided. Instead, everyone should focus on the importance of the healthcare providing spectrum understanding that PT's are ethical, knowledgeable, and capable of functioning as first-line providers. I believe PT's are willing to diagnose and treat within a professional scope, and with full understanding of what is out of bounds. I also believe this touches on why most people have described PT's as "not pretentious", it's simply because they know while they may be experts at certain things, there comes a point where problems must be passed to a physician. The key is eliminating a big brother little brother mentality, and replacing it with mutual respect and functionality, resulting in timely end effective health care. Call me naive, but this seems to be a solid route to take.

Good points especially at the end. Recently there was a meeting where I work and the "manager" went on and on about how the nurses "aren't our parents" ( I work per diem in acute ) and we don't need permission from them to see a patient, but that physicians are like parents ( while she gestured in the air with one hand signifying above ) and how we "have orders" to see patients. Personally I find this type of brainless paternalism disgusting and harmful not only to physical therapists and the profession but to patients. We should take ownership of our profession, think/feel/act as if we are not 3rd tier professionals, and have a professional attachment to our names while at work ( therefore first name basis is inappropriate ). Someone else referenced judges and physicians attire and title and how that signifies status and them representing something other than themselves. Gosh I'm pretty sure all professionals have a "game face" (represent there role/profession as opposed to just "being themselves") but somehow only the traditionally prestigious groups get special title and attire. I find this "team" and collaboration" talk just that and very hypocritical and flawed. First name basis for all non physicians in healthcare to me is trash and so it should be discarded. The argument that it "decreases" confusion also belongs in the garbage as it does nothing of the sort and actually the opposite ( am I PT/OT, therapy, therapies, physical therapy, a physical therapist, fiveoboy, physical therapist, or fiveoboy your physical therapist). I introduce myself as fiveoboy, PT to hospital staff. And fiveoboy, physical therapist to patients. It's not semantics, it's actually important to be particular, and it DECREASES confusion.

 

[ptisfun2]

Good points especially at the end. Recently there was a meeting where I work and the "manager" went on and on about how the nurses "aren't our parents" ( I work per diem in acute ) and we don't need permission from them to see a patient, but that physicians are like parents ( while she gestured in the air with one hand signifying above ) and how we "have orders" to see patients. Personally I find this type of brainless paternalism disgusting and harmful not only to physical therapists and the profession but to patients. We should take ownership of our profession, think/feel/act as if we are not 3rd tier professionals, and have a professional attachment to our names while at work ( therefore first name basis is inappropriate ). Someone else referenced judges and physicians attire and title and how that signifies status and them representing something other than themselves. Gosh I'm pretty sure all professionals have a "game face" (represent there role/profession as opposed to just "being themselves") but somehow only the traditionally prestigious groups get special title and attire. I find this "team" and collaboration" talk just that and very hypocritical and flawed. First name basis for all non physicians in healthcare to me is trash and so it should be discarded. The argument that it "decreases" confusion also belongs in the garbage as it does nothing of the sort and actually the opposite ( am I PT/OT, therapy, therapies, physical therapy, a physical therapist, fiveoboy, physical therapist, or fiveoboy your physical therapist). I introduce myself as fiveoboy, PT to hospital staff. And fiveoboy, physical therapist to patients. It's not semantics, it's actually important to be particular, and it DECREASES confusion.

This is an interesting post. I have the students discuss this article (hopefully attached) when we start talking about acute care PT. I think this is an important point you brought up. We are consultations, and consult and offer advice. In the hospital, an ortho surgeon would consult an infectious disease doc for some crazy infection in a patient, and would consult a PT for some crazy movement dysfunction. There really is no difference.

About the Dr. thing. I live in a town with A LOT of PTs. I have noticed on NPR and the newspaper that most PTs use Dr. so and so with their advertisements and on the sign outside of the door. Those without a DPT obviously don't. A bunch of years ago, the AMA had a resolution that stated in a health care environment, physicians, dentists, and (I think) optometrists are the only ones who should use the term Dr. Now of course, this resolution was just that.. a resolution for the AMA with no 'teeth' anywhere else, but interesting nonetheless. When this was proposed, we brought it up to the students in a professional seminar we teach. The students response was surprising. They pretty much said they goal should be to raise the title of 'physical therapist' to the same perceived level as 'doctor' rather than dickering about silly titles. The students are, or course, naive, but I thought it was a refreshing point. I can try to find the resolution if anyone is interested, but that was a long time ago (like 2010).

Finally, I could not agree more with you about the 'game face' in a professional setting. A patient is a patient you treat..not your friend, not a confidante. Although working together on goals, there is a hierarchy with a PT/patient relationship, and certainly should be there. Lots of things can go into this, but titles, dress, interactions, etc. play a role in professionalism, and we (collectively as PTs) need to do a much better job of maintaining this 'game face.'

 

[NewTestament]

First name basis for all non physicians in healthcare to me is trash and so it should be discarded. The argument that it "decreases" confusion also belongs in the garbage as it does nothing of the sort and actually the opposite ( am I PT/OT, therapy, therapies, physical therapy, a physical therapist, fiveoboy, physical therapist, or fiveoboy your physical therapist). I introduce myself as fiveoboy, PT to hospital staff. And fiveoboy, physical therapist to patients. It's not semantics, it's actually important to be particular, and it DECREASES confusion.

I'm not sure what you're saying here, Fiveoboy. How do you prefer that patients call you? Even though I'm earning a DPT, I simply don't feel comfortable with anyone calling me "doctor, so and so." In the outpatient clinic where we see patients many times, I think the first-name basis is important as it builds trust between the therapist and the patient. My objection is that physicians can call us by our first name while we have to refer to them as "doctor." That's paternalistic. And yes I wish PT's could decide who needed and didn't need physical therapy. But the AMA will spend every dollar it has to make sure physicians remain "king of the hill."

 

[DesertPT]

So if you're a PT and you work with a physician, would you routinely refer to him as "Dr. So and So?"

Well I'm not a practicing PT yet but as of now, yes I probably would. I suppose it would depend on how well I actually knew the person or how comfortable we were around each other. But I personally don't have a problem calling a physician "Dr." under any circumstance. They certainly go through the training to deserve it.

At the same time, it is going to be a long while before a PT can walk into a hospital room and say "Hi I'm Dr. NewTestament from physical therapy" without causing any patient confusion. I think the points made regarding using the Dr. title on advertisements/business cards/door signs for PTs is more realistic then PTs referring to themselves as "Dr. so-and-so" with patients all the time.

 

[sss_pt]

This is an interesting post. I have the students discuss this article (hopefully attached) when we start talking about acute care PT. I think this is an important point you brought up. We are consultations, and consult and offer advice. In the hospital, an ortho surgeon would consult an infectious disease doc for some crazy infection in a patient, and would consult a PT for some crazy movement dysfunction. There really is no difference.

About the Dr. thing. I live in a town with A LOT of PTs. I have noticed on NPR and the newspaper that most PTs use Dr. so and so with their advertisements and on the sign outside of the door. Those without a DPT obviously don't. A bunch of years ago, the AMA had a resolution that stated in a health care environment, physicians, dentists, and (I think) optometrists are the only ones who should use the term Dr. Now of course, this resolution was just that.. a resolution for the AMA with no 'teeth' anywhere else, but interesting nonetheless. When this was proposed, we brought it up to the students in a professional seminar we teach. The students response was surprising. They pretty much said they goal should be to raise the title of 'physical therapist' to the same perceived level as 'doctor' rather than dickering about silly titles. The students are, or course, naive, but I thought it was a refreshing point. I can try to find the resolution if anyone is interested, but that was a long time ago (like 2010).

Finally, I could not agree more with you about the 'game face' in a professional setting. A patient is a patient you treat..not your friend, not a confidante. Although working together on goals, there is a hierarchy with a PT/patient relationship, and certainly should be there. Lots of things can go into this, but titles, dress, interactions, etc. play a role in professionalism, and we (collectively as PTs) need to do a much better job of maintaining this 'game face.'

Do you feel there is a particularly delicate balance between maintaining a professional "game face" and appearing empathetic enough to maintain a strong therapeutic alliance? I'm a believer that in order to get the best patient response, and I believe research supports this, a solid relationship is crucial. This may not mean behaving like a best friend, but is there a chance putting on a metaphorical judge's cloak or doctor's coat could exude a coldness? Physicians can often come across as having zero empathy, is that a trait PT's want to strive to mimic? I understand I'm taking the "game face" notion to an extreme, but I feel balancing professionalism, while also aiming for maximum results, is difficult terrain to navigate.

 

[ptisfun2]

Do you feel there is a particularly delicate balance between maintaining a professional "game face" and appearing empathetic enough to maintain a strong therapeutic alliance? I'm a believer that in order to get the best patient response, and I believe research supports this, a solid relationship is crucial. This may not mean behaving like a best friend, but is there a chance putting on a metaphorical judge's cloak or doctor's coat could exude a coldness? Physicians can often come across as having zero empathy, is that a trait PT's want to strive to mimic? I understand I'm taking the "game face" notion to an extreme, but I feel balancing professionalism, while also aiming for maximum results, is difficult terrain to navigate.

I think by and large, patients trust physicians and PTs. And that all health care providers exude empathy to patients...Patients need to feel like a health care provider is 'in their corner,' but too much familiarity is unprofessional. This is my opinion, but I don't think lab coats are bad. I think maintaining a professional distance from patients while being empathetic is important for ALL health care providers. I do not think PTs have a different responsibility for this than any other practitioner, nor do I think patient should consder us any differently as a professional than any other practitioner.

All that being said, I call my health care providers and all colleagues by their first names as they address me. Students call me by my first name or 'Dr. ptisfun2' depending on their preference. I do not care either way too much. I introduce myself as my first and last name (and if treating patients, I also state a physical therapist, but not to others) and let people call me what they chose to. My 'doctor' credential is a PhD.

 

[DesertPT]

Actually now that I think about it, whenever I see doctors as a patient, I pretty much just say "hey doc" when they walk in the room and leave it at that.

I haven't had any physicians as co-workers, so if I am in that scenario I imagine, like I said above, what I called them would depend on level of familiarity.

The coworkers I have had with Dr. titles have all been PhDs and I certainly don't call them Dr. on a routine basis. But again it depends on level of familiarity.

 

[sss_pt]

I think by and large, patients trust physicians and PTs. And that all health care providers exude empathy to patients...Patients need to feel like a health care provider is 'in their corner,' but too much familiarity is unprofessional. This is my opinion, but I don't think lab coats are bad. I think maintaining a professional distance from patients while being empathetic is important for ALL health care providers. I do not think PTs have a different responsibility for this than any other practitioner, nor do I think patient should consder us any differently as a professional than any other practitioner.

All that being said, I call my health care providers and all colleagues by their first names as they address me. Students call me by my first name or 'Dr. ptisfun2' depending on their preference. I do not care either way too much. I introduce myself as my first and last name (and if treating patients, I also state a physical therapist, but not to others) and let people call me what they chose to. My 'doctor' credential is a PhD.

I posed the question to you because you are so entrenched in the profession. I put a lot of value in your opinion and appreciate the answer.

 

[Fiveoboy11]

I'm not sure what you're saying here, Fiveoboy. How do you prefer that patients call you? Even though I'm earning a DPT, I simply don't feel comfortable with anyone calling me "doctor, so and so." In the outpatient clinic where we see patients many times, I think the first-name basis is important as it builds trust between the therapist and the patient. My objection is that physicians can call us by our first name while we have to refer to them as "doctor." That's paternalistic. And yes I wish PT's could decide who needed and didn't need physical therapy. But the AMA will spend every dollar it has to make sure physicians remain "king of the hill."

You shouldn't feel comfortable with anyone calling you doctor so and so until you've actually earned a doctorate. If you're still in school then you're not a PT, and you didn't earn a doctorate in physical therapy.

I think it's important to address yourself with your title attached. I.e. I'm fiveoboy physical therapist. If someone later wants to know my name again it's fiveoboy physical therapist. Not fiveoboy from physical therapy or fiveoboy one of the therapists here or fiveoboy. I'm not a therapist I'm a physical therapist and I'm from Wisconsin. Why not a therapist? Because a "therapist" could be: a PT, PTA (they call themselves therapists), OT, COTA, massage therapist, respiratory therapist, PhD clinical psychologist, a chiropractic aide (yes they are introduced and masquerade as a therapist). Why not physical therapy? Because that's what my profession is and that's what I practice. Being from there would very weird. Talk about confusing. Therapist is a generic and unprotected term. Back to what I was talking about. If someone wants to call me by my first name from then on that's fine but I don't invite it. We've exchanged names, they know what I am. Now lets not negate any professional introduction or status I have or have made by inviting they call me by my first name 'cause now we're "buddies" or "we're a family here." I think the argument that "going by first names" (inviting it) promotes trust is mythology. Just like there's collaboration and teamwork in healthcare anywhere near where it should be. Mythology. And I think that the idea of a physical therapist being on a "first name basis" with a patient and that having nothing to do with the tendency of paternalism of physicians toward physical therapists (I'm the doctor, that's physical therapy or the therapist or PT or etc, BUT NOT fiveoboy the physical therapist) is laughable. The "doctor" doesn't have a clue who or what you are, neither does the patient (you're just like the PTA or the tech), and you invited that.

 

[The_Trainer]

We are the most educated when it comes to MSK disorders yet we garner the least amount of respect when it comes to reimbursement / direct access.

That title belongs to ATCs my friend

 

[Azimuthal]

That title belongs to ATCs my friend

No.

 

[jdaniels360]

The_Trainer, care to elaborate?

 

[truthseeker]

I think he/she is talking about the least amount of respect part and I agree.

 

[DesertPT]

That title belongs to ATCs my friend

Did you really think this little gem was going to go over well here?

 

[Fiveoboy11]

I think the mismatch between physical therapist knowledge and respect and lack of direct access is by far more devastating in healthcare. Direct access has a lot to do with timing (how fast you can see someone) and efficacy (how effective something is in healthcare often diminishes over time). Don't all 50 states have "direct access" to ATC's in the acute phase? I.e. Athletic trainer covering an athletic contest is the "first line provider" and has ultimate say over the athlete when there is an injury do they not? Sort of like saying a paramedic doesn't have direct access. It would be good/nice for them to have full unrestricted direct access, even for follow ups at their discretion, to care for athletes PRN of course. But wouldn't it be nice if a PT were to be right there after an elderly person fell, or after an ankle sprain, or a tweaked low back? And even if they were what happens? They go to the "doc" and probably never see that PT again (witness to the MOI). Patient access to healthcare immediately PRN is quite important across the board if you ask me. ATC's have that don't they? ATC's are recognized as first line providers for hyperacute athlete injuries right? At least they can help people when the help they can provide is most helpful.

 

[ptisfun2]

I think the mismatch between physical therapist knowledge and respect and lack of direct access is by far more devastating in healthcare. Direct access has a lot to do with timing (how fast you can see someone) and efficacy (how effective something is in healthcare often diminishes over time). Don't all 50 states have "direct access" to ATC's in the acute phase? I.e. Athletic trainer covering an athletic contest is the "first line provider" and has ultimate say over the athlete when there is an injury do they not? Sort of like saying a paramedic doesn't have direct access. It would be good/nice for them to have full unrestricted direct access, even for follow ups at their discretion, to care for athletes PRN of course. But wouldn't it be nice if a PT were to be right there after an elderly person fell, or after an ankle sprain, or a tweaked low back? And even if they were what happens? They go to the "doc" and probably never see that PT again (witness to the MOI). Patient access to healthcare immediately PRN is quite important across the board if you ask me. ATC's have that don't they? ATC's are recognized as first line providers for hyperacute athlete injuries right? At least they can help people when the help they can provide is most helpful.

I can only speak for my state, but ATs work 'under general orders from MDs' on our college campus. I think that is state law. So, although treating S-A on the field, it is not technically direct access. In some of my research, I cannot have ATC screen potential participants, but PTs can. This is because ATs need 'general MD orders' and PTs have unrestricted direct access. This is from my AT colleagues who know their practice act far better than I do.

 

[The_Trainer]

Looks like I brought the kerosene.. I did not mean ATs are more educated, I meant to say they are not respected for reimbursement purposes.

I can only speak for my state, but ATs work 'under general orders from MDs' on our college campus. I think that is state law. So, although treating S-A on the field, it is not technically direct access.

Yes. It is illegal to provide athletic training services without the supervision of a physician. The 'on the field' AT role, which is just one aspect of the profession, is that of a first responder.

Also, in the state I live/work in, It's extremely difficult and rare for an AT to bill and be reimbursed for services provided. The popular practice is for ATs to work in PT clinics, and are only reimbursed through PTs. If an AT stretches a hamstring or administers an ultrasound treatment, they cannot bill for this service unless the PT's bill.

Currently Medicare does not recognize athletic trainers as capable of administering rehabilitative services, and states that for ATs to receive recognition and payment from Medicare a change in the statutes would need to take place. A change in the statutes can only be accomplished through Congressional action. A change in congressional action usually requires strong lobbying. APTA = ~90,000 members, NATA= ~35,000 members.

I'm not pro/anti PT or AT. I think it, like everything else, comes down to $$$. Unfortunately there is bad blood between the two professions, when there could be such potential.

 

[The_Trainer]

Also- i'm not intending to fight for which profession gets the bottom of the barrel haha, just trying to state some facts.

 

[NewTestament]

I'm not pro/anti PT or AT. I think it, like everything else, comes down to $$$. Unfortunately there is bad blood between the two professions, when there could be such potential.

The turf war between the various health professions only hurts consumers and patients. No lobbying body, including the APTA, will ever admit that. No one trusts patients to make their own decisions. Everyone lobbies under the pretext of "patient safety" to pass laws that expand their scope of practice and limits that of others.

 

[truthseeker]

I have written this before and I will write it again. I am a DPT/ATC and have been a practicing AT for (OMG) 27 years and PT for 24. I was in NO WAY qualified to treat any unwell patient after graduating from AT. We did not learn about comorbidities, neurological disorders, rheumatological disease, cardiac disease other than sudden cardiac death syndrome among other things typically not associated with a young athletic population. I have worked with and gone to school with many athletic trainers. some were brilliant, some were not. The brilliant ones are capable of learning some of those things on the job so long as they work with other professionals who have been properly trained what to look for and what to do when they find it. But they cannot see what they are not trained to see and unfortunately, there is no way to determine which ATC has that training and which one does not. The same can be said of a PT or DC working a sideline.

We are way off topic

 

[jino76]

Thanks all for the replies.
I asked this question because i wanted to know how you are perceived in your country(technician/consultant) I am from India and i have been working for 3 years.In 2006 when i tell someone in my country that i am studying Physiotherapy ,most of them dont have a clue about what it is ,And some ask if its massage.Same scenario with my neighbor ,he was old ,diagnosed with lung cancer and was going to die soon .I went to see him ,then he asked what was i doing then he asked to massage his back.So i did it,because it was one of his last wish 😀.He died after a week.

Now in 2015, when i tell someone that i am a Physiotherapist ,I will get this question "Um..Physiotherapist...Doctor ,Right ? "
Here PTs with bachelors are allowed to put Dr as prefix and PT as suffix,as always the medical council is against it.It was a much needed action to put Dr as prefix ,otherwise people will think about us as technicians.I dont want to put Dr or want somebody to call me but when i am not getting respect for the work , i do need to work that way, after all I assess,diagnose and treat patients.
I dont know how things work in your country ,but if you have a problem with your eye ,do you just blindly go to Dr XXX or Dr XXX Ophthalmologist ?Why there should be a confusion ?

 

[engmedpt]

Disclaimer: There is a pretty big thing going on by March 31st with a bill that apparently does NOT address the therapy cap and from my limited understanding and does concern reimbursements. As someone about to enter school, I'm not sure if I can do much but spread the word. Check out APTA's site or posts on the fb page. Defnitely looks incredibly important for licensed PT's on here.

 

[markelmarcel]

At my clinic, I always introduce myself as Dr. First Name Last Name. Then, at some point I say, you can call me by my first name. Many of my patients give me nicknames involving doc/Dr but I don't demand it. Additionally, our administrative staff always refer to us as Dr. Last Name when addressing us in front of patients to be courteous and professional.

 

[sharpieaccent]

Disclaimer: There is a pretty big thing going on by March 31st with a bill that apparently does NOT address the therapy cap and from my limited understanding and does concern reimbursements. As someone about to enter school, I'm not sure if I can do much but spread the word. Check out APTA's site or posts on the fb page. Defnitely looks incredibly important for licensed PT's on here.

could you tell me more about this?

 

[engmedpt]

Go to the group's fb page. It's all over there.

 

[jjjDPT]

could you tell me more about this?

TUESDAY, MARCH 24, 2015RSS Feed
SGR Repeal…Without Therapy Cap Repeal? APTA Calls for Urgent Action

March 25, 2015: This story was expanded from its original March 24 version to include quotes from the APTA president as well as links to a press release and updated information on the APTA website.
Legislation now introduced in the US House of Representatives that would end the flawed sustainable growth rate (SGR) is missing a permanent repeal of the therapy cap. According to APTA advocacy staff, it's a troubling omission for physical therapists (PTs), and one that has sparked renewed calls for member action from APTA.
The bill ready for House consideration repeals the SGR, but only includes a 2-year extension of the therapy cap exceptions process. Supporters of therapy cap repeal believe that the best chance of ending the cap exists when it's tied to an SGR repeal bill.
Although APTA supports SGR repeal and other features of this particular bill, "We don't view a 2-year extension of this policy as a win," said Mandy Frohlich, APTA vice president of government affairs. "It separates the therapy cap repeal from the SGR repeal, which is problematic."
In an action alert issued on March 24, APTA warned that the exclusion of a permanent therapy cap repeal in the SGR legislation "is a missed opportunity for a long-term solution and puts beneficiaries in a dire situation when this [proposed 2-year] extension expires." Members are being urged to contact their legislators to call for a permanent repeal of the cap to be included with any bill that would repeal the SGR. APTA has posted the latest information on the issue at the association's therapy cap webpage.
The association also joined the American Occupational Therapy Association and the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association in issuing a news release that calls the separation of a permanent repeal of the SGR from a permanent therapy cap repeal "a risky approach for Medicare beneficiaries." Occupational and speech-language-hearing therapies are also impacted by the therapy cap.
"If Congress fails to include a permanent solution for the therapy cap in this bill, it will have purposely missed the only significant opportunity in almost 20 years to fix this critical patient issue," said APTA President Paul Rockar Jr, PT, DPT, MS, in the joint news release. "A bipartisan solution has been negotiated. These policies were created together. They should be fixed together."
In the (likely) event that Congress does not complete its work on this bill before it recesses on March 28, it is unclear how lawmakers will respond to a looming March 31 deadline that would trigger 21% cuts in Medicare payments via the SGR. It is possible that legislators would approve a short-term extension of the current fixes, but no formal proposals have been released.
Even if the SGR bill is approved by the House in the coming days, the Senate would be pressed to take it up before Congress recesses. The break, coupled with some Democrats' concerns about other provisions in the legislation, could open a window that would allow grassroots and lobbying efforts to have a greater impact.
Though the current SGR legislation lacks the crucial therapy cap element, it does include some provisions that are generally supported by APTA. Among them:
Positive changes to the competitive acquisition program for Medicare durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics, and supplies
The inclusion of the Protecting Integrity in Medicare Act, which bolster's Medicare's ability to fight fraud
However, the lack of a permanent repeal of the therapy cap represents a glaring flaw in the legislation, according to Frohlich.
"It's more important than ever for members to speak up on this issue," said Frohlich. "We will continue to work with Senate champions to slow this down to correct this policy."
The legislative landscape around the SGR and therapy cap continues to change. APTA will monitor the situation and update members as events warrant; however, the need for grassroots efforts on the therapy cap remains urgent. Find out how you can take action.

 

[engmedpt]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/27/u...ormula-and-extending-childrens-insurance.html

^Posted in med forum.

 

[keyboardmouse]

TUESDAY, MARCH 24, 2015RSS Feed
SGR Repeal…Without Therapy Cap Repeal? APTA Calls for Urgent Action

March 25, 2015: This story was expanded from its original March 24 version to include quotes from the APTA president as well as links to a press release and updated information on the APTA website.
Legislation now introduced in the US House of Representatives that would end the flawed sustainable growth rate (SGR) is missing a permanent repeal of the therapy cap. According to APTA advocacy staff, it's a troubling omission for physical therapists (PTs), and one that has sparked renewed calls for member action from APTA.
The bill ready for House consideration repeals the SGR, but only includes a 2-year extension of the therapy cap exceptions process. Supporters of therapy cap repeal believe that the best chance of ending the cap exists when it's tied to an SGR repeal bill.
Although APTA supports SGR repeal and other features of this particular bill, "We don't view a 2-year extension of this policy as a win," said Mandy Frohlich, APTA vice president of government affairs. "It separates the therapy cap repeal from the SGR repeal, which is problematic."
In an action alert issued on March 24, APTA warned that the exclusion of a permanent therapy cap repeal in the SGR legislation "is a missed opportunity for a long-term solution and puts beneficiaries in a dire situation when this [proposed 2-year] extension expires." Members are being urged to contact their legislators to call for a permanent repeal of the cap to be included with any bill that would repeal the SGR. APTA has posted the latest information on the issue at the association's therapy cap webpage.
The association also joined the American Occupational Therapy Association and the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association in issuing a news release that calls the separation of a permanent repeal of the SGR from a permanent therapy cap repeal "a risky approach for Medicare beneficiaries." Occupational and speech-language-hearing therapies are also impacted by the therapy cap.
"If Congress fails to include a permanent solution for the therapy cap in this bill, it will have purposely missed the only significant opportunity in almost 20 years to fix this critical patient issue," said APTA President Paul Rockar Jr, PT, DPT, MS, in the joint news release. "A bipartisan solution has been negotiated. These policies were created together. They should be fixed together."
In the (likely) event that Congress does not complete its work on this bill before it recesses on March 28, it is unclear how lawmakers will respond to a looming March 31 deadline that would trigger 21% cuts in Medicare payments via the SGR. It is possible that legislators would approve a short-term extension of the current fixes, but no formal proposals have been released.
Even if the SGR bill is approved by the House in the coming days, the Senate would be pressed to take it up before Congress recesses. The break, coupled with some Democrats' concerns about other provisions in the legislation, could open a window that would allow grassroots and lobbying efforts to have a greater impact.
Though the current SGR legislation lacks the crucial therapy cap element, it does include some provisions that are generally supported by APTA. Among them:
Positive changes to the competitive acquisition program for Medicare durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics, and supplies
The inclusion of the Protecting Integrity in Medicare Act, which bolster's Medicare's ability to fight fraud
However, the lack of a permanent repeal of the therapy cap represents a glaring flaw in the legislation, according to Frohlich.
"It's more important than ever for members to speak up on this issue," said Frohlich. "We will continue to work with Senate champions to slow this down to correct this policy."
The legislative landscape around the SGR and therapy cap continues to change. APTA will monitor the situation and update members as events warrant; however, the need for grassroots efforts on the therapy cap remains urgent. Find out how you can take action.

So not looking good? What exactly will happen if this bill is passed?