Re: Impingement syndrome recommendations (Full Version)

All Forums >> [RehabEdge Forum] >> Manual Therapy



Message

Jon Newman -> Re: Impingement syndrome recommendations (March 11, 2005 1:08:00 AM)

Hi Andrew,

I'm absolutely an APTA member. However, I don't own the module. I'm assuming that there are references in this module. Would you be able to supply the references?

Thanks,

jon



chiroortho -> Re: Impingement syndrome recommendations (March 11, 2005 10:09:00 AM)

Didn't mean to open the can of worms about titles.

My issue with 'Dr. Priest, DC' is simply that it's redundant, since 'DC' means doctor of chiropractic. It's like Catch 22, only instead of Major Major Major Major, I'd be 'Dr. Dr.'

In my opinion the most proper way for me to sign my name is Greg Priest, DC.



nari -> Re: Impingement syndrome recommendations (March 11, 2005 11:04:00 AM)

Greg

No can of worms here, no problems!
I did work for three years with academics (all PhDs in science) and they were adamant about the true meaning of the title 'doctor' - that it referred only to those who had completed the minimum three years PhD in a topic.
But then, they did not have much regard for popular public opinion....

My daughter signs herself with her name, plus MBBS,(Uni..) FRACGP, etc. Seems sensible.

Drew - fair enough, but I might still argue on a semantic level, that a basic degree plus a few certs and Masters, does not qualify for the title, and this applies across the board - in the health field and pure science field.

Nari



Andrew M. Ball PT PhD -> Re: Impingement syndrome recommendations (March 12, 2005 1:35:00 AM)

Nari,

I would agree that, "a basic degree plus a few certs and Masters, does not qualify for the title." That's not what a clinical doctorate is, nor is it the difference between an MS and a PhD --- the orignial and defensible body of research is what separates the two. At some point, however, with respect to the difference between MPT and DPT, a threshold of diagnostic skill is achieved by which a clinical doctorate is appropriate. In my experience, however, the average rank-and-file BSPT or MSPT is talking solely about NMS diagnostics during these type of discussions --- not the more comprehensive medical screening required to know when to treat and when to refer to a medical physician. In short, because their understand of the phrase "physical therapy diagnostics" is inappropriately myopic, most non-DPT's simply don't know what they don't know in that regard.

It is for that reason, quite frankly, that I'm personally AGAINST the idea of direct-access for PT's unless the PT in question either has a DPT, t-DPT, or has at the very least taken a Medical Screening course from someone like Boussinault or Goodman.

Drew



nari -> Re: Impingement syndrome recommendations (March 12, 2005 2:40:00 PM)

Drew,
Thanks for your response; and I can understand what you are saying. Maybe I am just locked in a bit on outdated perceptions.
I also take your point on direct access - and here we are different, because in Australia, we have had direct access since the late 1970s, so many of us have grown up knowing nothing else,
The 'standard' degree here (I think it is the same as ????your DPT - not sure what your abbreviations mean at times) ensures that we can identify red flags, and know when we should refer on to the GP - and there have never been any problems that I have heard of or read about.

Even when a patient has come from a doctor with a referral, we sometimes pick up what the MD has missed and send them back. A not uncommon one is unrelenting pain, usually in the spine, and that the symptoms are quite uncharacteristic of benign conditions, despite XRs.
Another one is instability of a spinal segment, often with other signs..and so on.

Perhaps, then the basic course in the USA is not as comprehensive as ours, which means you are quite correct in having doubts about direct access.

Nari



Yogi -> Re: Impingement syndrome recommendations (March 14, 2005 3:00:00 AM)

Drew, wasn't impressed with Boussinaults online course. But I'm sure I would have learned more studying in a semester long course. Just not sure it would have been worth a semester.
I suspect Nari's last line has alot of truth to it.
Completed the minimum three years for a PhD. That's earned. Drew, having done both, how do you feel about the PhD difference. I used to see in the science literature when they used the term post-Doc, it was like they were junior to the Docs.
The question really is, is a DPT equivalent to a hard science PhD? And should it be? There are other questions, but that's the main one now.



Andrew M. Ball PT PhD -> Re: Impingement syndrome recommendations (March 14, 2005 10:48:00 AM)

Yogi,

It's hard for me to answer that kind of a question, for a couple of reasons:

1. The PhD is a terminal academic doctorate, the DPT isn't. It's not terminal, nor is it academic. It is an ENTRY-LEVEL clinical doctorate. The DScPT or DHSc is the closest analog as they are terminal clinical degrees, but even that's like comparing a PhD to an EdD.

2. Although I've completed a PhD and I'm in near completion of a DPT, my PhD, while rigorous with respect to qualitative research methods and healthcare management, is a far cry from the academic rigors of a PhD in say, neuroscience. That said, the PhD was far more time intensive and rigorous than a DPT is ever going to be --- even from a program going through what is often a 7-10 year accreditation process. That's not a statement of rigor, per se, but some have charged that the rigor of programs that are nationally or internationally accredited aren't as rigorous as programs that are regionally accredited. Rocky Mountain University is running into this problem, but I'd be the first to argue that the rigor of some of their programs far exceeds that of many, if not most, regionally accredited programs.

Anyway, my next patient's here --- more on this later.

Drew



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode

0.063