|
|
Re: PT ownership
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
Re: PT ownership - November 27, 2006 2:07:00 AM
|
|
|
Sebastian Asselbergs
Posts: 1191
Joined: September 29, 1999
From: Barrie, Canada
Status: offline
|
Rob, well done!
dfjpt- no typo here LOL
With regards to massage therapists - James makes a very good point about our vulnerability.
We are in a profession with a high number of uninterested and non-professional people. Many are not interested in what others do, what influence politics have on our work, what science really means.... Too many are only busy with making an income and 9-5 type of jobs. I realize not everybody can be ACTIVE in the profession, but man, we have a lot of deadwood.
Sorry for the rant, but we have only our own profession to thank when most will sink into obscurity and unenployment - Dr-title and all - in the next 20 years.
...I'll be having that coffee now I guess...
_____________________________
Mundi vult decipi
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - November 27, 2006 5:41:00 AM
|
|
|
proud
Posts: 941
Joined: March 22, 2006
Status: offline
|
Sebastian,
I posted previously about the amount of "deadwood" in our profession. Unfortunately, much of the "deadwood" happen to be private clinic owner's who put the shingle up in the 80's and have been hanging on without much contribution back to the profession. Shame on them.
Rob, good work.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - November 27, 2006 6:47:00 AM
|
|
|
JSPT
Posts: 282
Joined: April 19, 2005
From: Michigan
Status: offline
|
FWIW, I just had a relevant experience with a patient. This individual has been seeing both me and a therapist about 3 hours away (busy travel schedule) for separate but related problems.
The information that has been relayed to me about the other therapists treatment has raised so many red flags that I finally had to contact the individual myself.
It turns out that this practioner is a "Neuro-Muscular Therapist", as she put it, with a CMT background and no more. The patient was quite surprised when I pointed this out and had a hard time accepting my scientific rationale regarding why I was treating him the way that I have been, and not the way the other "therapist" has.
I told him that he needed to see only one of us for his issues, and left the choice up to him. I provided some references for my treatment rationale and gave him a few sources to investigate a bit further.
Ready for the kicker? This gentleman is an insurance vendor who is responsible for deciding what gets covered in a patient's treatment regimen.
_____________________________
JS
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - November 27, 2006 9:45:00 AM
|
|
|
proud
Posts: 941
Joined: March 22, 2006
Status: offline
|
Recall that I indicated a need for a designated expert in the field of MSK management a while ago. Of course this met with some opposition from familiar camps(oddly even a couple PT'S??).
Too many under qualified, non university trained individuals confusing the public with mis-information, all for their own financial gain. It is astounding that some regulation concerning this has not already occurred...
I am happy with the direction that PT has taken in recent years in both the US and Canada. The "deadwood" I mentioned in a previous post should be washed away within the next 5 years. And at around that time, an expert will be established who serves the interest of the public, not the other way around. Cannot happen soon enough in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - November 27, 2006 11:04:00 AM
|
|
|
ONstudentPT555
Posts: 224
Joined: July 25, 2006
Status: offline
|
Sebastian posts:
>>>>>We are in a profession with a high number of uninterested and non-professional people. Many are not interested in what others do, what influence politics have on our work, what science really means.... Too many are only busy with making an income and 9-5 type of jobs. I realize not everybody can be ACTIVE in the profession, but man, we have a lot of deadwood.
Sorry for the rant, but we have only our own profession to thank when most will sink into obscurity and unenployment - Dr-title and all - in the next 20 years.>>>>>>
Proud posts:
>>>>>>I am happy with the direction that PT has taken in recent years in both the US and Canada. The "deadwood" I mentioned in a previous post should be washed away within the next 5 years. And at around that time, an expert will be established who serves the interest of the public, not the other way around. Cannot happen soon enough in my opinion.>>>>>
You guys seem to paint very different pictures of the future of the profession.. as a student I am curious as to why you guys seem to have such opposing views...?
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - November 27, 2006 11:32:00 AM
|
|
|
Sebastian Asselbergs
Posts: 1191
Joined: September 29, 1999
From: Barrie, Canada
Status: offline
|
The difference is that I think 5 years is optimistic - IF any major shift takes place, it will take much longer than that. It's NOT just the "new" status and title, but the strength of a unified vision for the profession.
And yes, a "clinical expert" designation is coming, but cynic that I am, I am curious as to what the determining factors of that title will be?
I am afraid, and maybe too jaded, to be very optimistic about our future. As a profession, we are as scattered in our approaches as ever, despite the "EBM" focus of the last 15 years. Maybe it is because I tend to get a lot of referrals for patients who "have gone the distance" in other PT clinics already - to no avail (and many with horror stories).
So my opinion of what is happening in our profession may well be too negative, based on those experiences......
_____________________________
Mundi vult decipi
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - November 27, 2006 11:48:00 AM
|
|
|
ONstudentPT555
Posts: 224
Joined: July 25, 2006
Status: offline
|
Hey
Thanks for the reply.
sebastian posts:
>>>>And yes, a "clinical expert" designation is coming,>>>
This sounds interesting to me.. can you elaborate at all about what exactly this will mean and how it will come about...
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - November 27, 2006 1:07:00 PM
|
|
|
proud
Posts: 941
Joined: March 22, 2006
Status: offline
|
ON Posts:
>>>>>You guys seem to paint very different pictures of the future of the profession.. as a student I am curious as to why you guys seem to have such opposing views...?>>>>
Actually, I think sebastian and I agreed that we have some "deadwood" currently. We differ on the positive steps that have been taken. In the US, the DPT has been a huge step forward for us and in Canada, we are all graduating at a Masters level. This will create a much more dedicated group. Who is going to go to university for a min 6 years and not be career focused?
When I mention 5 years, I am indicating that is when we will begin the process of claiming the "expert" status. All the deadwood gone, replaced by a new generation of EB practitioners with a great deal of political power with the gold standard university credentials to support that title.
The entire process will take an additional 10 years.
Individuals who care to take the time to investigate things the way Rob did, is the kind of professional talent we require going forward.
Name me any other MSK group with the progressive steps forward that PT has taken? Chiropractors recognize this and are desperate to aquire university affiliation. The incredible lack of scientific merit behind the majority of chiropractic teachings will never see that affiliation occur.
I like where we are going.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - November 27, 2006 6:42:00 PM
|
|
|
savela
Posts: 63
Joined: October 7, 2004
From: toronto
Status: offline
|
OnStudent,
I have not been practicing long, but I am going to be blunt and still try to be as professional as I can.
I have written many letters to the OPA, CPA about referral for profit. I have had worked in an MD owned clinic, who used my billing number when I was not working.
I have been hired for MVA fraud clinics, and quit when I figured it out.
I have worked for PT owned "fake and bakes".
These type of clinics give PT a bad reputation.
Patient's are referred to these clinics, mainly from their family MD's, (in TO, many ask for kick backs), and do not get better.
These pts. feel "physio does not work" and search out alternative med./treatment.
These alternative practioners, spend time with the pts. and treat in an open concept, (NOT a 15 min /treatment, like the "dead wood" PT owned clinics).
I honestly feel if PT's are going to take control of our profession, we must stop working for MD's, and stop giving kick back's for MD for referrals.
I am guilty myself, I do not work for a PT owned clinic. This is because every PT owned clinic I have worked for, has limited my treatment time, and has not allowed me professional consideration.
I work in a health club, and can determine how much time I need with pts. I practice ethically.
I would prefer to have all clinics be PT owned, but here in On, I feel that is long gone.
EBM is key, but pts. want to feel that they are not being treated by a revolving door.
"Boutique" private clinics are opening up monthly.
ONstudent........ I know you respect the PT's who teach some great post grad courses (you have quoted some), but did you look up who they work for?
In Ontario, we have some direct access. Maybe the only way for Physio to survive is to market EBM and to focus on the insurance companies.
I am more than willing to meet with others, who feel the same way I do.We must lobby these companies, the gov., and the press to talk about this issue.
Many PT's in ON, will not be interested, because they afraid to "bite off the hand that feed's us".
Let's stop giving the MD's the control... we all know that we have direct and treat most out pt. ortho. conditions.
This may sound like an unprofessional statement, but this is how feel. Cut the MD's out.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - November 27, 2006 6:59:00 PM
|
|
|
dfjpt
Posts: 238
Joined: April 9, 2006
Status: offline
|
On the contrary, savela, that was a great speech on behalf of PT. You go get'em! :D
Working in a health club as an independent contractor I would hope? I'm more of a "boutique" type - I would never work for anyone but me again as long as I live.
Diane
PS: Proud, please don't leave the nervous system out of our "expert" scope. It's not MSK only.. ;)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - November 28, 2006 12:40:00 AM
|
|
|
Sebastian Asselbergs
Posts: 1191
Joined: September 29, 1999
From: Barrie, Canada
Status: offline
|
proud, thanks for clarifying that. I still have not as much confidence that the "deadwood will be gone - How do you see that? There will still be many owners and PTs who have an established practice and NO reason to change...It will take much longer before they are toast...
Savela - e-mail me privately?
_____________________________
Mundi vult decipi
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - November 28, 2006 3:48:00 AM
|
|
|
proud
Posts: 941
Joined: March 22, 2006
Status: offline
|
Diane,
neuro-musculo-skeletal...of course.
Sebastian,
You may be correct. We have "the Mcdonalds" of physiotherapy around our region. It is unlikely he will give up on his cash cow any time soon.
He pays his PT's garbage and is more interested in making big bucks than providing excellent patient care.
Here is the thing: The onus is on each individual PT to stand up and refuse to work for technicians( masseurs etc) and poor clinic owners. We need to recognize that our training is far and away superior and places us as the experts in NMSK treatment.
I know of a new graduate PT whose first job was to work for a massage guy. I admit to being extremely disappointed with this individual. I question why this individual graduated with such poor pride in their career. Working in this capacity reflects poorly on our position as THE experts. I encourage anyone in similiar circumstances to reconsider pronto.
I think with all new graduates being DPT and MPT, this will happen. This should force the hand of of few of these disgusting clinic owners.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - November 28, 2006 5:52:00 AM
|
|
|
dfjpt
Posts: 238
Joined: April 9, 2006
Status: offline
|
[QUOTE]We have "the Mcdonalds" of physiotherapy around our region.[/QUOTE]In BC they are referred to as "sawmills." I think there are perhaps fewer of them here.. they took a big hit when PT was delisted as a completely covered service in 2001.
Proud, when you say "N-M-Sk" I hope you keep the "N" from blurring completely into the "M" and getting buried by it. (Technical point: as an ectodermal derivative it needs to remain distinct in our minds from, and outside of, everything/anything mesodermal, because it senses, interprets, assigns duties to, and for the most part controls everything mesodermal. Furthermore it is the only system capable of producing the phenomenon known as "pain.")
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - December 11, 2006 9:28:00 PM
|
|
|
Jwhite5495
Posts: 1
Joined: December 11, 2006
Status: offline
|
I'm new to this board but i just read many of your posts concerning non PT ownership of PT clinics and being from the USA I warn you, do not let this happen. It has happened here in the US and we PT's are now slaves to the BIG business machine and the docs. ...J WHITE MSPT
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - December 12, 2006 7:16:00 AM
|
|
|
james097
Posts: 178
Joined: January 27, 2005
From: West Vancouver BC
Status: offline
|
jennifer, Slaves are captured and forced to work. American PTs go willingly. Perhaps there is something wrong with the selection process regarding students.
Jim McGregor
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - December 12, 2006 4:29:00 PM
|
|
|
rwillcott
Posts: 425
Joined: March 20, 2006
From: Canada
Status: offline
|
I have come to recognize that those in power and volunteering within the college can have their own personal agendas. Usually they are clinic owners that are concerned with financial gain. I am sure that this happens in many other professions. However, PT has been sucked dry by many clinic owners who have become greedy and have not been working in the best interest of the profession.
I too once worked for the "McDonald's of Physiotherapy" Luckily this was only for a brief time. If we continue to work at these clinics then don't expect to see change. Advise your peers not to work in this clinics as well. And if you can't find a decent clinic to work in then open your own and become the respectable clinic in your area.
Also, get involved with your college and attend every meeting. You'd be surprised the issues they try to sneak by us hoping we don't notice. Don't be afraid to ask questions and make people accountable. For too long we have not taken an active role in our profession and this has hurt us. I recommend organizing a small group of PT's in your areas with similar concerns and pressure your college for change.
Rob
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - December 12, 2006 5:28:00 PM
|
|
|
dfjpt
Posts: 238
Joined: April 9, 2006
Status: offline
|
Way to post, Rob! Some more ideas:
1. Get interested in your own future. Kiss the slavedrivers goodbye and open your own small excellent practice, improve your skills. Don't worry, you won't starve.
2. Have an opinion and voice it. Amazingly, it will register on the radar of the profession, one way or another.
3. A profession will only be as good as its active members. Stop being slaves. Embrace freedom and influence the future of the profession.
4. Kill apathy.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - December 12, 2006 6:58:00 PM
|
|
|
ONstudentPT555
Posts: 224
Joined: July 25, 2006
Status: offline
|
Hey guys,
I just wanted to bring up a fact that is somewhat disturbing to me. The more and more I talked to PTs who have been working or in business here in Ontario the more they tell me that the Ontario College is making life unnecessarily difficult for physio in this province...
thier guide lines are too strict and unresonable compared to other professions making it difficult to compete in the market at times... and also they dont seem to be interested in issues that are effecting the PT profession and not interested in protecting the publics interests aswell
For instance... there are numerous clinics that are not operated by physios or even have a physio working at them and yet they are advertising the clinic as a physiotherapy clinic .. this is because they have allowed the term physiotherapy to remain unprotected.. also sometimes these non-PT owned clinics abuse the PTs that work for them by billing for things that they have not even done ..and then the college fines the PT and nothing happens to the actual crooket clinic owner... this seems horribly wrong to me.
Isnt it time for some kind of a change or reform......and isnt it time to start advocating to protect the profession.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - December 12, 2006 7:55:00 PM
|
|
|
savela
Posts: 63
Joined: October 7, 2004
From: toronto
Status: offline
|
OnStudent,
I feel some of our guidelines are professionally degrading (ie the Jurisprudence exam and the random "on-site assessement program")....but at least these may be a reminder to those who do not practice "ethically" to re-think how they work.
I think the system could be improved by making post grad education mandatory in Ontario. If a PT does not keep current with their skills, they should not be allowed to practice.
As far as non-PT owned clinics, it is the PT who chooses to work for these owners,and their responsibility to watch what is billed and pratice ethically.
Like I have said in past posts....... it is an indivdual choice to work for a PT, MD or others.
Many of our "mentors", teachers of post grad courses and "supervised practice PT's" ( who we need to get our 90 hours of supervised practice, for our intermediate exam), work for non PT owned clinics.
I have worked for PT's and they paid me less than half what I am make per hour currently and I had to treat 4 Pt's per hour (now I treat 2).
Yes, change is needed, but until PT owned clinics step up, and match what other owners offer, it will not happen. The average pay per hour for a PT with a least 6 years of post high school ed. is extremly low when compared to other professionals in Canada.
Call around and you will find that in most cases PT owned clinics pay the least (25% per pt. vs 40-60%).
If PT's really want to control the profession in Ontario, we need to compete with other clinic owners, and choose not to work for MD's who are referring for profit.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PT ownership - December 13, 2006 12:31:00 AM
|
|
|
Sebastian Asselbergs
Posts: 1191
Joined: September 29, 1999
From: Barrie, Canada
Status: offline
|
ONstudent, the designation of "physiotherapy" is NOT an issue that falls under the jurisdiction of our College - it is NOT their mandate to protect the profession - it is very clear in their statutes that the College is there to protect the public.
Similarly - the College has NO jurisdiction over other professions or persons - they CAN'T go after the non-PT owners.
All Colleges for professionals have that mandate here in Ontario (and other provinces) They don't advocate FOR the profession - they police the profession.
And those high standards are indeed a burden, but a necessary one IMO. As PTs we have to let our own public know HOW strict oiur regulations are compared to other professionals - we can use it as a positive!
And Savela - I offered 55% 6 years ago to potential associates - but the lack of steady daily caseloads was a turn off....They were in need of steady paychecque and did not really put a lot of value on the potential mentorship I might have offered. It must be me.....
_____________________________
Mundi vult decipi
|
|
|
|
 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 |
|
0.094
|
Printable Version
All Forums >> [RehabEdge Forum] >> Open Forum >> Re: PT ownership 
