Re: Acrimony on the List Serve and Job Dissatisfaction [3 Attachments]

[Guest guest]

Rick,I received the following from Ralph , executive director of the Colorado VMA this afternoon.Thanks, Dr. Van Dyke, for asking me to clarify the background on the legislative and regulatory framework for animal physical therapy in Colorado. In 2007, House Bill 1126 was introduced into the Colorado legislature, sponsored by Representative Anne McGihon. Preceding the bill’s introduction, the Colorado Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA) had been in discussions over a two-year period with members of the Canine Working Group of the American Physical Therapy Association – Colorado to discuss how a system for animal physical therapy might work where licensed physical therapists who undertook animal-specific education could become registered with the state could thus be conferred a special authority to provide animal physical therapy (without that action being considered a violation of the veterinary practice act). In addition to the education and registry requirements, the system also requires that animal physical therapy can occur only when a veterinary medical clearance from a licensed veterinarian has been provided to a licensed physical therapist, thus providing an important safeguard for both patient and public protection and maintaining the veterinarian’s role as diagnostician and leader of the animal healthcare team. The system also defines how consumer complaints would be addressed by the physical therapy licensing board (since in Colorado only they have the statutory authority to discipline a licensed physical therapy) following consultation with the veterinary licensing board about the animal healthcare issues involved in a complaint. When House Bill 1126 was introduced, it did require (from our perspective) some amendments to address concerns as noted in our testimony – but that testimony clearly indicates that, as amended, CVMA was in support of the legislative proposal. CVMA subsequently worked diligently with the Department of Regulatory Agencies as very specific rules were developed and implemented to interpret the broad concepts that were set forth in House Bill 1126. Together, the legislative and regulatory components establish the framework for animal physical therapy in Colorado. Cheers,Ralph Ralph Executive DirectorColorado Veterinary Medical Association www.colovma.orgColorado Veterinary Medical Foundation www.cvmf.orgDenver Area Veterinary Medical Society www.davms.org Offices at the CVMF on Center for Animals191 Yuma Street, Denver, CO 80223 phone fax mobileRalph@... Any questions, please let me know.Jan

Janet Van Dyke, DVMDipl. American College Veterinary Sports Medicine and RehabilitationCEO and FounderCanine Rehabilitation Institute, Inc.www.CanineRehabInstitute.comAffiliate FacultyColorado State UniversityCollege of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical SciencesJanet.van_dyke@...Director, International Veterinary Academy of Pain Management (IVAPM)www.ivapm.orgTreasurer, American Association of Rehabilitation Veterinarians (AARV)www.rehabvets.orgChair, Residency and Credentials CommitteeAmerican College of Veterinary Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation (ACVSMR)www.vsmr.org

Jan,

I have so much respect for all that you do for veterinary medicine, you are truly an innovator and leader! I read your previous post but decided not to reply, I have now changed my mind.

Your comments in both posts:

<<<<<<<<<"As I stated in an earlier post, the Colorado legislative change was done through collaboration between the CO VMB, CO VMA, and the CO PT Board. This is very similar to the process that took place in Nevada, which you applaud.">>>>>>>>>>

The Colorado legislation did not involve participation of the Colorado DVMs or Colorado VMA until after their opposition was voiced in Senate hearings, (see Testimony at Senate hearings in 2007, attachments below). Additionally, in Nevada, the veterinary BOE maintains control over animal physical therapy rather than the PT board. The Nevada program is very detailed and specific regarding "animal physical therapy", Colorado is rather vague.

Colorado DVMs and their VMA did not support the legislation without suggested changes in the original writing, it does not seem that they were originally asked by Representative McGihon to participate in original draft. Not all requests by DVMs were adopted!

From: Testimony before the House Health and Human Services Committee In regard to HB 07-1126 - Colorado VMA - Executive Director - Ralph - February 2007 (attached below)

February 5, 2007<<<<<<<<"In order to protect the health of the animal, it is necessary to establish some kind of collaborative relationship between a veterinarian and the physical therapist who provides therapy to the animal. We believe that a requirement that the physical therapist obtain a “veterinary medical clearance” prior to treating the animal is in the best interest of protecting the animal from inappropriate or contraindicated care, and in safeguarding public health from the transmission of zoonotic disease. Input from the Colorado Board of Veterinary Medicine in setting up necessary education and clinical experience requirements, as well as the handling of complaints against physical therapists who treat animals, will relieve much of our concern about this expansion of the scope of practice of physical therapists. Veterinarians are also concerned that by granting this special authority to physical therapists that no limitation is placed on the veterinarian’s licensed authority to provide physical therapy for animals.">>>>>>>>>>>>

Also at this same time another House Bill - 07-1296 was before the Colorado legislator "Animal Owner Choice of Care" that was opposed by Colorado DVMs, VMA and Colorado State Faculty. This bill ultimately died in the Senate, however if it had passed DVMs would have been bypassed altogether for chiropractic care, acupuncture and many other integrative therapies. In my opinion this would have completely opened the door for direct access of the veterinary patient to a number of service providers, including physical therapists. (Attached below)

I sincerely want a collaborative effort involving all of the professions involved in veterinary rehabilitation and the veterinary patient will gain greatly from this professional cooperation. The tremendous number of off-list responses I have received to these ongoing discussion tells me that many others wish the same!

Rick Wall, DVM