Bobcat
Posts: 493
Joined: July 13, 1999
Status: offline
|
Am I mistaken, or was the entire DPT initiative based on a commercial need by those in outpatient practice to compete more effectively with chiropractors, osteopaths and orthopedists?
Is such a move necessary to increase dominance in the entire market? Does neurological rehab need DPT? Wouldn't Ph.D. in neurophysiology or motor control be more specific and useful?
Why is dominance in outpatient necessary if PT service is valid, necessary and non-redundant?
Does it actually impact technical skill or improve the knowledge base to have many more DPTs doing the same manual methods as anyone else, as opposed to B.S.P.T.'s with Ph.D.'s in engineering design or structural dynamics?
The establishment of curricula conveying applied skills -- as opposed to informative courses on how other people read x-rays and MRIs -- providing real support to the degree title, is secondary it seems.
This seems especially so given the absence of a practical or scientific foundation, beyond that of a five or six year Bachelor's degree requirement, in support of a level of knowledge that doesn't yet exist. Sort of like trying to reboot without an operating system.
There are not enough people are doing productive research due to the underdevelopment of post-baccalaureate level technical skills and research skills. Faculty knowledge in non-PT disciplines is underdeveloped.
Not sure why.
It is clear that even more extensive exposure to weekend retreats wherein even more advanced myofascial stretching techniques or mysterious ways to move the bony plates of the cranium back and forth are nice -- to give something to do with clients that may be slightly different from the regular stretching and prodding done last week -- but such methods are not useful for scientific inquiry. Nor does the manner in which such methods are accepted without critical scrutiny prove conducive to advancement of the scientific basis of this profession.
So, that's just more air guitar.
|