Sunday, May 29, 2022

(no subject)

TEC

Dear Richard,

Thank you very much for your thoughts. Incidentally, I’ve heard from

fellow practitioners as well as patients, that the BAPO meetings are

exceptional…great attendance, excellent organization, and relevant

presentations… Maybe we here in the US could learn a few things from

the British.

Best regards,

Lisa Schoonmaker, CPO

———-

From: TEC Web

Sent: Thursday, June 11, 1998 8:09 AM

To: Lisa S

Subject: email

Subject:

Politics, manufacturers, etc. A comment from the UK.

Date:

Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:34:35 +0000

From:

Richard Hirons >

To:

Richard [email protected]

11.06.98 13:34

I’m occasionally entertained by the ‘US political’ discussions that are

aired on the oandp list, but a little bemused by the public drubbing

that

is directed at certain individuals from time to time. The current issue

regarding whether you people have a relationship with the manufacturers

or

not is interesting in that the essential issue here is the professional

status of prosthetist/orthotists. I’m not familiar with the politics in

the

US and offer no judgement on the issues under discussion, but recognise

issues that must surely be common throughout the world. I have these

personal thoughts to offer to the debate.

As a prosthetist, I can ask myself this question: Do I belong to an

industry or a profession? Are they different, or is it the same?

We, like Dentists and even Orthopaedic Surgeons (just random examples)

are

professionals who are dependent on the use of commercially available

products. In our practice we use these products, need to know how to use

them, and more importantly understand why we are using them and how they

will best serve the objectives that we are trying to satisfy.

I was interested to see a comment about dropping the term ‘scientific’

from

the US meetings. This is a shame. There’s very little proper science in

P/O, unlike other health professions. I think as prosthetists and

orthotists we are all too wrapped up in ‘products’. Not enough is

happening

with regard to techniques and clinical issues. Just think about the

ratio

of R&D funding in prosthetic socket design (I don’t mean CADCAM and

silicone and that stuff) to that of components and hardware. There’s no

comparison. The same is true with regard to post graduate education. To

the

prosthetic end user, surely the socket is one of the most important

area’s

(go on, tell me I’m wrong). This is the area where the profession must

take

a little time out and just deal with and focus on clinical issues,

practice

issues, rehabilitation issues and the like. The profession needs to do

this

and the industry needs to understand that it is not a snub, or a

statement

or whatever. It’s part of what we do, possibly the most important part

and

certainly the most underated.

Here in the UK, our professional organisation, BAPO, has made great

efforts

to seek formal recognition of our professional status from the

government

agencies. Just last year we were finally accepted in the Council for

Professions Supplementary to Medicine (CPSM). Our professional status is

now officially recognised.

Yes, I belong to a profession. A profession that is dependant on a

thriving

industry for hardware support. Each is dependent on the other, but each

has

a unique agenda and must be allowed to do their own thing from time to

time

without upsetting the other.

Incidentally, I don’t think my hands are ‘goofy’ and I certainly don’t

need

a ‘shit filter’. Such impressive vocabulary.

Richard Hirons

Prosthetist.

RECENT NEWS

Get unlimited access!

Join EDGE ADVANTAGE and unlock The O&P EDGE's vast library of archived content.

O&P JOBS

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

The O&P EDGE Magazine
Are you sure want to unlock this post?
Unlock left : 0
Are you sure want to cancel subscription?