|
|
SB 146 Arkansas
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
SB 146 Arkansas - February 2, 2007 3:53:00 AM
|
|
|
teston
Posts: 38
Joined: August 27, 2003
Status: offline
|
http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/ftproot/bills/2007/public/SB146.pdf
Look at 17-81-102, 6-A, 6-B, 6-C and 6-D. Also, read 8-ii
9-B defines Manipulations with a cavitation, sound.
All of this and 17-81-302, 4-A limits the practice of Physical Therapy to what the Arkansas Chiropractic Board determines in not Chiropractic.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 2, 2007 5:19:00 AM
|
|
|
steve
Posts: 470
Joined: May 14, 2003
From: Canada
Status: offline
|
It is really sad that this type of political issue continues despite strong research evidence (Done by Physical Therapists) that manipulation of the lumbar spine is effective and can be learned in a short period of time by novice clinicians. Whos interests are being served by this type of legal positioning? Certainly not the patients.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 2, 2007 5:37:00 AM
|
|
|
proud
Posts: 944
Joined: March 22, 2006
Status: offline
|
What a great point Steve. Shameful that legal posturing gets in the way of what is in the best interest of patients.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 2, 2007 6:16:00 AM
|
|
|
teston
Posts: 38
Joined: August 27, 2003
Status: offline
|
"Whos interests are being served by this type of legal positioning?"
Who would you think? If this bill passes than what a Physical Therapist does in the state of Arkansas will be dictated by the Chiropractic board.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 2, 2007 6:36:00 AM
|
|
|
dfjpt
Posts: 238
Joined: April 9, 2006
Status: offline
|
ooh... that is so not right.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 2, 2007 8:12:00 AM
|
|
|
james097
Posts: 178
Joined: January 27, 2005
From: West Vancouver BC
Status: offline
|
If I were a chiropractor in Arkansas or any other State for that matter, knowing that nintey percent of what I did was going to be done as well, if not better, by another profession I would want to see a bit of protectionism.
It is peculiar though that for the most part physical therapists seem to care little, and hardly ever object or try to curtail other professions from encroaching on the their turf.
Jim McGregor
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 2, 2007 8:52:00 AM
|
|
|
proud
Posts: 944
Joined: March 22, 2006
Status: offline
|
In the end, it will be whomever provides the most effective, safe and cost efficient care that will dictate future proceedings. Research will eventually make the murky NMSK management waters more clear.
Turf wars are unfortunate and not in the best interest of patient care. Basically, provide the best care you can and the research will eventually lead the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 2, 2007 1:56:00 PM
|
|
|
PTupdate.com
Posts: 1478
Joined: October 8, 2001
From: Pittsburgh, PA USA
Status: offline
|
That's quite scary. Who was asleep at the wheel in Arkansas while all this was going on?
John Duffy, PT OCS
[URL=http://www.PTupdate.com]www.PTupdate.com[/URL]
_____________________________
John M. Duffy, PT
Board Certified Orthopaedic Clinical Specialist
www.PTupdate.com
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 2, 2007 3:58:00 PM
|
|
|
cej7
Posts: 33
Joined: August 22, 2004
Status: offline
|
"Turf wars are unfortunate and not in the best interest of patient care. Basically, provide the best care you can and the research will eventually lead the way."
But if because of turf wars, providers are restricted in performing literature supported care, the research is pointless.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 2, 2007 4:42:00 PM
|
|
|
Baltimore Physio
Posts: 4
Joined: February 19, 2006
Status: offline
|
I believe that when Arkansas re-wrote their practice act they gave up thrust manipulation in order to obtain direct access back in the 80's.
aggressive political advocacy determines many outcomes when it comes to lawmaking and who can do what.
A strong unified message from all PT's to statehouses across the country is imperative.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 2, 2007 5:35:00 PM
|
|
|
teston
Posts: 38
Joined: August 27, 2003
Status: offline
|
"That's quite scary. Who was asleep at the wheel in Arkansas while all this was going on?"
The bill is still in committee.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 2, 2007 9:46:00 PM
|
|
|
ianwvu
Posts: 71
Joined: June 11, 2004
From: Glendale, AZ
Status: offline
|
Wow. So basically Chiros can "without limitation" practice Physical therapy? What a crock.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 3, 2007 4:22:00 AM
|
|
|
ONstudentPT555
Posts: 224
Joined: July 25, 2006
Status: offline
|
This is pretty pathetic.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 3, 2007 5:42:00 AM
|
|
|
cej7
Posts: 33
Joined: August 22, 2004
Status: offline
|
Meanwhile, today's Evidence in Motion blog highlights the following, titled "Podiatrists Jump onto the POPTS train" http://www.podiatrytoday.com/article/6695
No better time to join the APTA, even if you disagree with components of the organization, it's the largest voice we have. Besides, if nothing else, it makes for cheap 'union' dues, unless you like other organizations directing our practice...
~liz
(by the way--I do not work for the APTA :)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 3, 2007 6:01:00 AM
|
|
|
jlharris
Posts: 477
Joined: April 12, 2006
From: Nebraska
Status: offline
|
Absolutely rediculous. My favorite (besides chiropractic being able to provide PT with out limits) is the change from chiropractic "practitioner" to "physician". I may have missed it, but when the hell did chiros start going to medical school? Or any university for that matter. Physician...LOL what a joke.
Is this the same state that fined the PT 10K for manipulating a "mole" posing as a pt needing PT?
_____________________________
Jason L. Harris, PT, DPT
My PT Blog
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 3, 2007 6:26:00 AM
|
|
|
drbuddy
Posts: 429
Joined: July 30, 2005
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline
|
Hey now, you can cheer on PT without bashing chiros...
No, I didnt attend medical school, but I attended chiropractic school. You can make the argument that our clinical experience in school pales in comparison to MD or DO school, but even so I feel quite confident going up against 'real doctors', especially when it come to ddx of neuro vs msk vs internal conditions.
Not to go further into a pissing match, but last time I checked my scope it was fairly unlimited minus the ability to prescribe drugs and perform surgery. I performs DOT physicals and am reimbursed for physician level E/M codes. All that doesnt necessarily make me a physician, but it is what it is. Also, in many states the scope of chiro has always included the use of modalities, hands on, and exercise therapy. It's funny that PT came along, expanded, and now says "Well, that's what we do, you shouldnt be allowed to do that!"
If it's a joke to you that chiros are called physicians, then what do you think about PTs being called doctors? PT is changing it's curriculum, titles, scope, etc. so that they can be in the position that chiros enjoy already. So, I think it's extremely hipocritical for any PT to laugh at chiros while cheering PT for doing the same thing. That is the joke.
All of this is political posturing. It's going to happen between all professions because those in charge are responsible for doing whatever they can to advance their respective profession. I could just as easily call you all rehab nurses and glorified massage therapists/personal trainers, but I'm not ignorant and realize you can do much more AND respect you all enough not to say that.
Sorry, too much coffee this morning I guess : )
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 3, 2007 7:07:00 AM
|
|
|
teston
Posts: 38
Joined: August 27, 2003
Status: offline
|
"Is this the same state that fined the PT 10K for manipulating a "mole" posing as a pt needing PT?"
Yes, my husband, Michael Teston. You can read about it at [URL=http://www.defendphysicaltherapy.com.]www.defendphysicaltherapy.com.[/URL] The section of the new bill that I referenced last in the first message limits the Arkansas Physical Therapists by using the chiropractic boards action against Michael. The $10,000 check that we wrote to the chiropractic board came from our personal account. In case you haven't read the case Michael did nothing more than a grade 3 mobilization on a patient that later was seen by a chiropractor for over a year prior to filing a complait with the chiroparctic board. The private investigator that was sent to our clinic posing as a patient did not even have that. So, before anyone says that he did something out of his scope of practice and that he deserved to sell his truck you need to read the facts of what happened.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 3, 2007 8:46:00 AM
|
|
|
ONstudentPT555
Posts: 224
Joined: July 25, 2006
Status: offline
|
Since when is grade 3 mobilization not part of a PTs scope. Maybe its time for PTs to start protecting thier scope of practise and protecting thier own profession. IF this were to happen in Ontario I would seriously start considering finding a new profession...but fortunetly with advance status coming in ...things seem to look pretty decent for the profession although there are still some serious concerns.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 3, 2007 10:01:00 AM
|
|
|
teston
Posts: 38
Joined: August 27, 2003
Status: offline
|
"Since when is grade 3 mobilization not part of a PTs scope. "
It is part of the scope of physical therapy practice in Arkansas.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SB 146 Arkansas - February 3, 2007 11:30:00 AM
|
|
|
TC PT
Posts: 37
Joined: January 5, 2007
Status: offline
|
teston, how do I gain access to the second site you linked?
I make this statement without full knowledge of the case but,I think your husband was railroaded. The fact that the Arkansas state PT assoc. was not up to the task of defending him is a crime in itself. Many states have had the threat of Chiros trying to control them and have been up to the challenge. What happened in Arkansas?
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
0.141
|
Printable Version
All Forums >> [RehabEdge Forum] >> Open Forum >> SB 146 Arkansas 
