- Joined
- Nov 13, 2002
- Messages
- 203
- Reaction score
- 0
I have mostly agreed with the things stated by both marcrusc and DrumHead with a few exceptions. In terms of licensure laws in Kansas and the ASHA scope of practice guidelines for audiologists, we can diagnose hearing loss. This often includes site-of-lesion (e.g., conductive, sensorineural, mixed, retrocochlear). We cannot gives medical diagnoses (e.g., otitis media, otosclerosis, acoustic neuroma, etc.). Physicians can also diagnose hearing loss (they can do pretty much anything allied health care professionals can) but this doesnt seem to be an issue of contention. Although we often use prescriptive formulas such as DSL and NAL-NL1, it should be known that there are other good prescription formulas out there such as Camfit and Cameq. Further, as good audiologist we should know that meeting target is not always appropriate. Many clients prefer about 3 dB less high-frequency gain in the high frequencies than is prescribed by NAL-NL1. This has been shown by Dillon and colleagues at NAL. In some cases, prescription targets are reduced in their utility, such as low-frequency, reverse slope loss. Try fitting to target on this type of sensorineural loss and see what response you get!
I would agree that there are few distinctions between us and hearing aid dealers which is a sad truth for our field. I believe they are not allowed to perform cerumen management or do vestibular but this may vary depending on state law. Hearing aid dealers would also not be employed in public schools, hospitals (including VA), the military, or universities. So it should be known that audiologists have a more diverse range of career opportunities.
Since i mainly dispense hearing aids, I try to distinguish myself with my knowledge base and my client-centered focus. I NEVER upsell a set of hearing aids! There are many features on hearing aids that have not been shown to yield significant clinical benefit so I tell my clients that and help preserve their pocketbook while providing them the means for them to improve their quality of life.
Contrary to what a previous post mentioned, I do not believe comparing an AuD to a PhD is apples to oranges. In my case I was in an AuD program and switched to a clinical PhD track. This typically will take 1 to 2 years beyond the typical 4 yr curriculum to obtain both your CCCs and the PhD. Programs such as East Carolina University and Montclair State University still offer clinical PhD/ScD programs. Even though my research focus is not really clinically applicable, I have found that what I have learned in the program has made me a better clinician than the majority of my classmates. Why am I being arrogant and how have I comes to this conclusion? Simple, I know why I do what I do and I know their advantages and disadvantages. I have a hunger for learning and trying new techniques and products. I am constantly being critical about the products I dispense and the procedures I use. You could easily argue that an AuD could do all the things I mentioned. Some could but many could not. Learning how to read the research literature is so important for integrating evidence based practice into your clinical practice. And I hate to tell you this but one course in stats and one in research methods doesnt cut it. You may or may not make more money as a PhD depending on what you do but I would argue that you will have the tools to be a better clinician and you will be respected by your colleagues.
I would agree that there are few distinctions between us and hearing aid dealers which is a sad truth for our field. I believe they are not allowed to perform cerumen management or do vestibular but this may vary depending on state law. Hearing aid dealers would also not be employed in public schools, hospitals (including VA), the military, or universities. So it should be known that audiologists have a more diverse range of career opportunities.
Since i mainly dispense hearing aids, I try to distinguish myself with my knowledge base and my client-centered focus. I NEVER upsell a set of hearing aids! There are many features on hearing aids that have not been shown to yield significant clinical benefit so I tell my clients that and help preserve their pocketbook while providing them the means for them to improve their quality of life.
Contrary to what a previous post mentioned, I do not believe comparing an AuD to a PhD is apples to oranges. In my case I was in an AuD program and switched to a clinical PhD track. This typically will take 1 to 2 years beyond the typical 4 yr curriculum to obtain both your CCCs and the PhD. Programs such as East Carolina University and Montclair State University still offer clinical PhD/ScD programs. Even though my research focus is not really clinically applicable, I have found that what I have learned in the program has made me a better clinician than the majority of my classmates. Why am I being arrogant and how have I comes to this conclusion? Simple, I know why I do what I do and I know their advantages and disadvantages. I have a hunger for learning and trying new techniques and products. I am constantly being critical about the products I dispense and the procedures I use. You could easily argue that an AuD could do all the things I mentioned. Some could but many could not. Learning how to read the research literature is so important for integrating evidence based practice into your clinical practice. And I hate to tell you this but one course in stats and one in research methods doesnt cut it. You may or may not make more money as a PhD depending on what you do but I would argue that you will have the tools to be a better clinician and you will be respected by your colleagues.