Letters to the Editor
Stay in the Game
As an attendee of the O&P leadership conference in Chicago in Nov. 2006, I left the sessions with many positive and unexpected impressions of the state of the O&P profession.
The February O&P Almanac article, “A Shared Vision for O&P,” describes well that this was truly an assembly of people who care a great deal and have contributed significantly to O&P for many years and in many roles. The meeting room was filled with men and women, some of whom have volunteered and served our profession for the past 40 years, including most of the leaders of the various associations.
Why set aside affiliations?
At the onset, all attendees were asked to set aside their egos (to be stored in a much larger adjacent room!) and their current affiliations (AOPA, ABC, BOC, AAOP, NAAOP, NCOPE, OPAF, etc.). This instruction was curious to me. While the ego part was clear, removing the alphabet soup of affiliations was less obvious.
I am a practitioner (CPO), a business owner (Scheck & Siress), a consumer of research (someday publisher), and an educator (former residency site director). Yet I have never considered these roles to be mutually exclusive.
Once we got down to the objective of the meeting, I was surprised how easily we were able to identify and agree upon the primary issues facing our profession, and then prioritize those issues in the order which they should be addressed for the benefit of the entire field.
This occurred despite the potential roadblocks (either real or perceived) created by the self-interest that particular organizational affiliations supposedly invoke. Maybe focusing on the whole picture instead of individual actions facilitated the process.
Top three initiatives
As the sessions wore on, there was energy, expectation (“Wow, something really good is happening here!”) and apprehension (“This has potential, but we’ve been here before.”).
This group, representing a cross-section of the entire O&P industry, identified the top three initiatives that need the support and resources of the entire field:
•develop one unified voice representing O&P
•work toward evidence-based practice
•enforce the regulation that stipulates only qualified O&P providers should receive
payment from Medicare.
One voice. One voice doesn’t mean one mind. Rather, it represents the thoughts of many being channeled through our leadership who then speak for the common good of our profession. Be sure you actively support the O&P Alliance (AOPA, ABC, AAOP, NAAOP). It’s the best example we have of one voice working for the betterment of our profession.
Evidence-based care. I believe evidence-based practice will evolve as a byproduct of the scientific community partnering with hospital-based facilities and private practice to document clinical outcomes. Certainly clinical research institutions will play a significant role in developing the evidence-based practice model.
Many private O&P facilities will have opportunities to contribute important data to outcomes research as well. Who better to document the success or failure of our treatment methodologies? We need scores of willing clinicians to participate in these efforts, sharing their collective knowledge and information.
This is how our profession starts the journey of writing our own history. Let’s make sure the practice standards of tomorrow are created by the O&P community (researchers and practitioners) of today, and not by another allied health community.
Ensure qualified provider standards. How can each of us impact the final initiative: ensuring Medicare only pays qualified providers for O&P services? Begin by working locally to adopt a licensure law. Regardless of our personal opinions on licensure, it’s clear that CMS sees value in it.
Participate in the next O&P Policy Forum. It’s a great way to see how the political process works in our country and you’ll have the opportunity to meet policy makers who can truly make a difference in your community.
Get involved!
By the close of the second day, all knew that despite the effort that went into the planning and enterprise of this meeting, it would be for naught without significant follow-through.
While this meeting was an important first step, the real work is yet to be done. How do we ensure these initiatives turn into something more than plaudits from the board room?
The answer, it seems to me, is rather simple. Adopt these as your own initiatives. Whether you’re a resident practitioner, an old-time metal bender, a facility owner, or an O&P educator, you can have an impact on the success or failure of these objectives.
Not sure where or how to begin? Here a few ideas (from someone familiar with the view from the sidelines):
Participate as a member in any/all of the organizations. Encourage fellow staff members to do the same.
Demand collaboration between the organizational associations. This will help prevent walls of division from being built and will make the best use of our membership dollars by not allowing the duplication of efforts, but rather encouraging coordination among the associations.
Communicate with the elected leadership. E-mail has made it easier than ever to offer thoughtful commentary.
Volunteer to serve on a committee in an area of personal or professional interest. This is the most satisfying way to participate.
If any of the three initiatives has struck a chord with you, contact the individuals who have been identified as the champions of these efforts:
One voice: Mac McClellan, mmcclellen@suddenlinkmail.com
Research: Tom Kirk, Ph.D., tkirk@hanger.com
Qualified provider: Peter Thomas, Esq., peterthomas@ppsv.com
Don’t drop the ball!
While the view from the sidelines is the safest, getting in the game is a lot more fun. The agenda has been set. It’s up to the leadership to forge partnerships. And it’s up to the membership (you and me) to hold the leaders of the various O&P groups to task and support their efforts. Feel free to contact me at michael.oros@scheckandsiress.com.
Michael Oros, CPO
President, Scheck & Siress
Vice Chair, NCOPE
What Practitioners Need for Research
I found the recent article “A Shared Vision for O&P” quite interesting. Within the article, it talked about the need for more evidence-based research, and for practitioners to be better consumers of research.
There is no question that this need exists, but it doesn’t necessarily need to fall on the shoulders of “multidisciplinary groups” born from focus groups—nor is this a chore for “Superman.”
Additionally, I don’t think that anyone would dispute the large voids that exist in the practitioner-generated research base. What we need to find are practical ways for practitioners to get involved. Frankly, research on any scale can be quite intimidating to a practitioner with a full patient load and limited financial resources.
What these practioners need is:
1. Motivation to contribute to their profession. This varies by individual.
2. Identification of a practical outcome measure that can be obtained within a clinical setting.
3. Access to cost-effective equipment to obtain data. We have successfully gathered walking velocity data in a clinic with a $250 gait timer that had about ten dollars’ worth of minor modifications.
4. A fundamental understanding of basic statistical tests. Practitioners need to understand basic statistical tests such as paired T-tests or two-sample T-tests, and have access to software that can help calculate those results. Perhaps a course at a national meeting or one hosted by a local university would give practitioners this knowledge.
5. A support group of some type to help answer questions throughout the process. AOPA, ABC, the Academy, NCOPE—all of these groups could provide support to practitioners as they conduct research.
Obviously, there is still a need to identify the most important research objectives.2. Identification of a practical outcome measure that can be obtained within a clinical setting.
3. Access to cost-effective equipment to obtain data. We have successfully gathered walking velocity data in a clinic with a $250 gait timer that had about ten dollars’ worth of minor modifications.
4. A fundamental understanding of basic statistical tests. Practitioners need to understand basic statistical tests such as paired T-tests or two-sample T-tests, and have access to software that can help calculate those results. Perhaps a course at a national meeting or one hosted by a local university would give practitioners this knowledge.
5. A support group of some type to help answer questions throughout the process. AOPA, ABC, the Academy, NCOPE—all of these groups could provide support to practitioners as they conduct research.
These are only a few practical ideas to empower the practitioners who have a tremendous amount to contribute.
Matthew J. Habecker, M.S., CPO
Clinical/Research Prosthetist/Orthotist
Prosthetic Center
Lansing, Mich.
