Re: Re: role of techs

January 25, 2012

My two cents...I think that everyone-- veterinarians, veterinary technicians, physical therapists, occupational therapists, physical therapist assistants, orthotists/prosthetists (and any other profession that I've not named)-- have made this an amazing field through contributions past and present. I respect all of you for that and my patients and clients thank you. I thank you for sharing your knowledge and experience.

Amie

January 26, 2012

I have very much enjoyed reading comments of all, it seems that we have two

discussion ongoing concerning the same topic. I have just been so busy I have

not had time to prepare further questions and comments.

The best discussions this group have involve all of the disciplines that

frequent this group. Discussing patient problems and stimulating input and

opinions from PTs, rehab RVTs, rehab DVMs and veterinary specialists is

continuing education for all. I do observe however that PTs are sometimes quick

to remind us what skills they possess that others don't. I am glad you

rejoined the discussion and further explained your comments and I also am very

impressed by your insight in veterinary rehabilitation both from a veterinary

technician's and PTs perspective.

Several in this discussion, both PTs and DVMs, suggest that veterinary

technicians should not perform " manual therapy " . Perhaps we should better

define what is and what is not considered " manual therapy " because I am of the

opinion the definition in veterinary medicine may differ from PTs definition

formed in their practice with people. I also ask if " manual therapy " is to only

be performed by PTs is it because it is of potential harm to the veterinary

patient if performed improperly or is because it is considered the practice of

physical therapy, or both? If either be the case why is " manual therapy "

education taught by PTs open to the veterinary technician in fee based

continuing education programs when according to the comments of others, it takes

years of experience to develop the skill?

I am not asking these questions for the sake of argument but rather for

clarification. I recently asked similar questions of ACVS diplomates who are of

the opinion that they should be the only ones performing most surgical

procedures rather than the primary care DVM however the ACVS offers rather

expensive education in many complicated surgical procedures with no prerequisite

for attendees.

Rick Wall, DVM

Certified Canine Rehabilitation Practitioner

Diplomate, American Academy of Pain Management

Certified Myofascial Trigger Point Therapist

Center for Veterinary Pain Management and Rehabilitation

The Woodlands, TX

www.vetrehabcenter.com

January 26, 2012

Hi to everyone involved in this interesting discussion that has morphed into

something much more emotional. I applaud for finally being the brave one

to acknowledge the elephant in the corner which is the where exactly does the

human physical therapist fit in the veterinary rehab field, what is their status

in veterinary medicine, what is their status compared to the licensed veterinary

technician and what is their status compared to the licensed veterinarian? It

is rather a gray area as both the CCRP and CCRT programs see the PT at the same

level as DVM in their certification but the CCRT program sees the technician as

only an assistant in their program. The ACVSMR does not recognize either the PT

or the licensed veterinary technician (LVT) as a potential member.

The CCRT being only for the DVM or PT has never seemed quite right with me. I

think there are many ways that you can look at the individual roles of the DVM,

PT and LVT. The team approach, such as the team of DVM, PT, LVT all equal or

the team of the DVM and PT as superiors with the LVT as an assistant, or the DVM

as the superior and the PT and LVT as assistants. However I have always

wondered how it is that the non-veterinary but human trained PT got to have the

same status level of the DVM in veterinary medicine. For that matter I also

wonder how it is that human chiropractors, massage therapists and acupuncturists

have come to this same status.

Before I jump into my opinions on these questions, let first give information

about the training of the LVT because I think it is important to identify the

knowledge base that the LVT brings to the team. I have just been part of a

group that has set up the curriculum for a veterinary technician school on the

campus of Central Oregon Community College and OSU-Cascades here in Bend. It is

a 2 year program with three 4 month long terms each year, so two full time

years. The curriculum includes anatomy and physiology (3 terms), veterinary

terminology, hospital management, animal nursing (4 terms), Animal Diseases (2

terms), Clinical Pathology (4 terms – includes microbiology, parasitology,

virology), Pharmacology, Anesthesiology, Surgical techniques and nursing,

Radiology, Dentistry, Public Health and then a total of 360 hours worked in

veterinary clinics spread evenly over Small Animal, Equine, Food Animal and

Emergency Practice. Graduates of this and other LVT programs in O

regon then go on to take a national exam and then if they pass it they take a

state jurisprudence exam. I think for the benefit of the LVT this is all

important for everyone in veterinary rehabilitation to understand.

Now about that elephant, the frank reality that we are all avoiding is that the

PT has no veterinary training other than what they learned in their

certification course or learned in their practice experience. Either way there

is no formal training. This does not mean that I think that the PT is not an

important asset to the practice of veterinary rehab or that they don’t come with

a unique set of manual and modality skills and knowledge. They do and way more

so than I do and my technicians do. This simply means they have minimal if any

training in veterinary medicine and they only have training in one species,

humans. Regardless of whether this is offensive to some, it is the reality and

it is an important point. This is why I have always thought that the DVM should

be the CCRT and the PT and LVT should be the CCRAs or better yet be like the

Tennessee program and have CRI make all three the CCRT. I have always

personally thought that what the PT brings to the veterin

ary rehab table is a set of hands on skills that can be directed to be used, to

assist in, and consult on, the treatment of the patients of the DVM. Perhaps

being considered a consultant or a collaborator would be a better way to view

it? What the PT is not is a DVM or an LVT. The LVT is trained in veterinary

medicine and that is something that should not be discounted by the rehab

community.

When I read statements like:

“As far as the comment about would a veterinarian who takes a two week course in

human therapy techniques and anatomy be able to work on humans even under the

supervision of a PT, seems fairly irrelevant. The therapist is bringing a skill

set and it is our occupation and the skills are needed to add to the team and

supply best practice as a whole. A vet would not be bringing needed skills to

supply physical therapy to the human world”,

and this statement,

“It's my understanding that LVTs also are NOT to do manual therapy i.e. joint

mobs. Our (CCRP) tech certainly does not. She IS a certified (human) massage

therapist and she does a lot of massage on the dogs; she has good hands and good

eyes and does a lot on her own and comes up with all kinds of good exercises but

she does not evaluate (except in a general sense of how the dogs are doing) and

does not do manual therapy and so it still falls to me or our PT to evaluate on

first visits and frequently re-eval on the fourth to sixth visit and sometimes I

see them even more frequently and some dogs are seen almost exclusively by our

PT”

I think of several points. First, of course, a DVM or LVT would not be bringing

anything to the human field. But that is not the point. The point is that the

PT is not bringing any veterinary medical skills to the field of veterinary

medicine, yet is being allowed to practice in our field without any formal

training in veterinary medicine. Animals are just as complex as humans and we

have multiple species meaning variation in anatomy, physiology and disease. I

think an analogy might be the engineer that designs the first artificial heart

and is definitely part of the team but would never be the team member to implant

it in a test animal or human. A second point is, that there is always, at least

for me, a feeling of reservation about non-veterinarians coming to my field and

practicing some form of veterinary medicine. I could make the same argument

about the technician that goes out and does a solo rehab practice. I think the

basic thought by many veternarians is, t

hat they went to veterinary medical school and obtained their DVM, so why should

those that have not be able to come and do the same or even some of the job. It

may not be 100% appropriate to feel that way and the PTs and LVTs may not like

it, but it is a feeling held by many veterinarians. I have had numerous

veterinarians convey to me that they feel the human trained health care

practitioners in veterinary medicine are invited and solicited guests in our

field based on their skill and knowledge set but do not have a right, given by

veterinary training and testing, to practice in our field. Again this does not

mean that the PT is not an important part of veterinary rehab at this point. I

am simply pointing out the opinion held by many DVMs. Point number three is

that a human massage therapist also has no training in veterinary medicine AND

is not a technician in any form. I agree that they should not be doing

evaluations; they should at most be doing the massage that i

s prescribed by the DVM with input from the PT. And should the human massage

therapist be creating exercises for the patient if they are not the person to do

the evaluations? Point number 4 is, why is the PT doing the evaluations with no

formal veterinary medical training? My opinion is that evaluations should be

done by the DVM (or DVM and PT together) and then the PT should be able to take

that information and recommend what manual and modality therapies should be

used. This is the skill set they bring to the table noted in the first quote

above. Why is it accepted that the PT should be seeing veterinary patients

without the supervision of the DVM? Does a multiple week training program and a

CCRP or CCRT certificate qualify a PT to evaluate a dog or cat with orthopedic

or neurologic disease? Why is the LVT excluded from doing an evaluation? Why

would we not delegate this to the LVT that has 2 years of formal veterinary

education? I think these are important question

s to ask of the veterinary community.

I think that there is a trend now which may be somewhat different from when

veterinarians first began to solicit the input and help of the PT in their

practices. The trend now seems to be that it has somehow become acceptable for

the PT to set up their own stand-alone practices, for the PT to render diagnoses

based on their exams, to discuss anatomic structure and function/dysfunction

with clients, to have discussions with clients about veterinary medical and

surgical conditions and procedures and to render prognoses. This is essentially

practicing an area of veterinary medicine. I read it every day on the Rehab

ListServ. The relevancy to the above quote is that other than the PT skill set,

the PT does not bring the skills to justify doing these aforementioned actions,

which it seems they are doing more and more commonly. Once again, I am not

suggesting that the PT does not have a place in veterinary medicine, but I am

suggesting that the PT should be under the supervisi

on of the licensed DVM. In Oregon the practice act allows the stand alone

clinic of a PT or DC but the PT or DC can only see cases that have been referred

by a DVM. They cannot take on non-referred appointments. Is this correct? I

think whether correct or not correct according to the law, what it creates is

the situation where the PT, DC, Acupuncturist or Massage Therapist is doing

exams, evaluations, rendering treatment plans, monitoring progress and

establishing prognosis without veterinary medical training and without DVM input

and supervision. Is this correct? Another relevancy to the previous quote is

that I would not attempt to do this in the human field and even I had some skill

to contribute to human health care I would not be allowed to practice that skill

unsupervised. These are all important questions and I think we all should think

them over, if for nothing else than the goal of providing the best, most

complete, most appropriate care for the veterinary reha

b patient.

I am sure I have stirred the pot quite a bit with this dissertation but we have

sort of danced around it for a long time and like most cross field relationships

that have occurred in veterinary medicine, we crossed the field before

establishing clear boundaries and rules. I don’t want to exclude the PT from

veterinary medicine but I think it is important for all of us on the rehab

“team”, the DVM, the PT and the LVT to all know our roles and limits. I

sincerely believe that the PT is an important addition to the field of

veterinary rehabilitation! I do not and would never presume to think because I

have a CCRT that I am the equal of the PT in physical rehabilitation (“therapy”

-- still ridiculous it cannot be called that), nor would I presume to think that

I can handle a patient, draw blood, trim nails, etc… like that of an LVT. But

nor should the PT or LVT presume that they should function in the role of the

DVM. Sorry ahead of time if this angers anyone but I have nev

er been very good at sitting on my hands. If you believe this is inappropriate

for the rehab list, please feel free to hurl insults directly to me on my email:

mbparchman@...

Have a great day!

Mark B. Parchman, DVM, DACVS, CVA, CCRT

January 28, 2012

Where did all of you "cubbyholers" come from? Every week I have interns and residents rotate through neurology and I ask them hard questions so they can think the answer through and when I turn my back my technician often whispers the answer to them. She always knows the answers because she has done a few thousand neuro exams with me and she reads and has seen a thousand surgeries and MRI's and CT's. She and I share cases and unexpected findings all day long. Would you want a neuro exam by one of our young certified doctors or my tech? Hands down my tech any day of the week.My PT skills aren't as good as I'd like but i have learned from some of the best and most devoted PT's doing animal rehab I can imagine and then I go home and I read and I e-mail and ask questions. My skills are better and better over the last 6-7 years. And so many of these PT's have paid their dues to get where they are and to understand animal biomechanics who's secret handshake is only known to veterinarians.We run a large rehab program and I trust my techs to know when to ask questions and when to get the orthopod involved and through years of experience we have all grown. We all make mistakes and it isn't because of our certification but because we misjudge with the best intentions. I think that veterinarians do spend too much time protecting their turf and it is the same with the PT's. And we do spend too much time not letting trained Technicians do enough. At the end of the day one's experience counts and that can cross any line there is. The young veterinarian should always be thankful when the experienced tech helps them understand the answer. Are the credentials and the skills of the individual one and the same? I don't think so.SteveTo: VetRehab From: k9habber@...Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 04:29:16 +0000Subject: Re: role of techs

Clarification-I meant the DVM /PT certified in rehab_ I.e CCRT or CCRP in the entirety of the post.

Sherri

> >

> > Hi to everyone involved in this interesting discussion that has morphed into something much more emotional. I applaud for finally being the brave one to acknowledge the elephant in the corner which is the where exactly does the human physical therapist fit in the veterinary rehab field, what is their status in veterinary medicine, what is their status compared to the licensed veterinary technician and what is their status compared to the licensed veterinarian? It is rather a gray area as both the CCRP and CCRT programs see the PT at the same level as DVM in their certification but the CCRT program sees the technician as only an assistant in their program. The ACVSMR does not recognize either the PT or the licensed veterinary technician (LVT) as a potential member.

> >

> > The CCRT being only for the DVM or PT has never seemed quite right with me. I think there are many ways that you can look at the individual roles of the DVM, PT and LVT. The team approach, such as the team of DVM, PT, LVT all equal or the team of the DVM and PT as superiors with the LVT as an assistant, or the DVM as the superior and the PT and LVT as assistants. However I have always wondered how it is that the non-veterinary but human trained PT got to have the same status level of the DVM in veterinary medicine. For that matter I also wonder how it is that human chiropractors, massage therapists and acupuncturists have come to this same status.

> >

> > Before I jump into my opinions on these questions, let first give information about the training of the LVT because I think it is important to identify the knowledge base that the LVT brings to the team. I have just been part of a group that has set up the curriculum for a veterinary technician school on the campus of Central Oregon Community College and OSU-Cascades here in Bend. It is a 2 year program with three 4 month long terms each year, so two full time years. The curriculum includes anatomy and physiology (3 terms), veterinary terminology, hospital management, animal nursing (4 terms), Animal Diseases (2 terms), Clinical Pathology (4 terms – includes microbiology, parasitology, virology), Pharmacology, Anesthesiology, Surgical techniques and nursing, Radiology, Dentistry, Public Health and then a total of 360 hours worked in veterinary clinics spread evenly over Small Animal, Equine, Food Animal and Emergency Practice. Graduates of this and other LVT programs in O

> > regon then go on to take a national exam and then if they pass it they take a state jurisprudence exam. I think for the benefit of the LVT this is all important for everyone in veterinary rehabilitation to understand.

> >

> > Now about that elephant, the frank reality that we are all avoiding is that the PT has no veterinary training other than what they learned in their certification course or learned in their practice experience. Either way there is no formal training. This does not mean that I think that the PT is not an important asset to the practice of veterinary rehab or that they don't come with a unique set of manual and modality skills and knowledge. They do and way more so than I do and my technicians do. This simply means they have minimal if any training in veterinary medicine and they only have training in one species, humans. Regardless of whether this is offensive to some, it is the reality and it is an important point. This is why I have always thought that the DVM should be the CCRT and the PT and LVT should be the CCRAs or better yet be like the Tennessee program and have CRI make all three the CCRT. I have always personally thought that what the PT brings to the veterin

> > ary rehab table is a set of hands on skills that can be directed to be used, to assist in, and consult on, the treatment of the patients of the DVM. Perhaps being considered a consultant or a collaborator would be a better way to view it? What the PT is not is a DVM or an LVT. The LVT is trained in veterinary medicine and that is something that should not be discounted by the rehab community.

> >

> > When I read statements like:

> > "As far as the comment about would a veterinarian who takes a two week course in human therapy techniques and anatomy be able to work on humans even under the supervision of a PT, seems fairly irrelevant. The therapist is bringing a skill set and it is our occupation and the skills are needed to add to the team and supply best practice as a whole. A vet would not be bringing needed skills to supply physical therapy to the human world",

> > and this statement,

> > "It's my understanding that LVTs also are NOT to do manual therapy i.e. joint mobs. Our (CCRP) tech certainly does not. She IS a certified (human) massage therapist and she does a lot of massage on the dogs; she has good hands and good eyes and does a lot on her own and comes up with all kinds of good exercises but she does not evaluate (except in a general sense of how the dogs are doing) and does not do manual therapy and so it still falls to me or our PT to evaluate on first visits and frequently re-eval on the fourth to sixth visit and sometimes I see them even more frequently and some dogs are seen almost exclusively by our PT"

> >

> > I think of several points. First, of course, a DVM or LVT would not be bringing anything to the human field. But that is not the point. The point is that the PT is not bringing any veterinary medical skills to the field of veterinary medicine, yet is being allowed to practice in our field without any formal training in veterinary medicine. Animals are just as complex as humans and we have multiple species meaning variation in anatomy, physiology and disease. I think an analogy might be the engineer that designs the first artificial heart and is definitely part of the team but would never be the team member to implant it in a test animal or human. A second point is, that there is always, at least for me, a feeling of reservation about non-veterinarians coming to my field and practicing some form of veterinary medicine. I could make the same argument about the technician that goes out and does a solo rehab practice. I think the basic thought by many veternarians is, t

> > hat they went to veterinary medical school and obtained their DVM, so why should those that have not be able to come and do the same or even some of the job. It may not be 100% appropriate to feel that way and the PTs and LVTs may not like it, but it is a feeling held by many veterinarians. I have had numerous veterinarians convey to me that they feel the human trained health care practitioners in veterinary medicine are invited and solicited guests in our field based on their skill and knowledge set but do not have a right, given by veterinary training and testing, to practice in our field. Again this does not mean that the PT is not an important part of veterinary rehab at this point. I am simply pointing out the opinion held by many DVMs. Point number three is that a human massage therapist also has no training in veterinary medicine AND is not a technician in any form. I agree that they should not be doing evaluations; they should at most be doing the massage that i

> > s prescribed by the DVM with input from the PT. And should the human massage therapist be creating exercises for the patient if they are not the person to do the evaluations? Point number 4 is, why is the PT doing the evaluations with no formal veterinary medical training? My opinion is that evaluations should be done by the DVM (or DVM and PT together) and then the PT should be able to take that information and recommend what manual and modality therapies should be used. This is the skill set they bring to the table noted in the first quote above. Why is it accepted that the PT should be seeing veterinary patients without the supervision of the DVM? Does a multiple week training program and a CCRP or CCRT certificate qualify a PT to evaluate a dog or cat with orthopedic or neurologic disease? Why is the LVT excluded from doing an evaluation? Why would we not delegate this to the LVT that has 2 years of formal veterinary education? I think these are important question

> > s to ask of the veterinary community.

> >

> > I think that there is a trend now which may be somewhat different from when veterinarians first began to solicit the input and help of the PT in their practices. The trend now seems to be that it has somehow become acceptable for the PT to set up their own stand-alone practices, for the PT to render diagnoses based on their exams, to discuss anatomic structure and function/dysfunction with clients, to have discussions with clients about veterinary medical and surgical conditions and procedures and to render prognoses. This is essentially practicing an area of veterinary medicine. I read it every day on the Rehab ListServ. The relevancy to the above quote is that other than the PT skill set, the PT does not bring the skills to justify doing these aforementioned actions, which it seems they are doing more and more commonly. Once again, I am not suggesting that the PT does not have a place in veterinary medicine, but I am suggesting that the PT should be under the supervisi

> > on of the licensed DVM. In Oregon the practice act allows the stand alone clinic of a PT or DC but the PT or DC can only see cases that have been referred by a DVM. They cannot take on non-referred appointments. Is this correct? I think whether correct or not correct according to the law, what it creates is the situation where the PT, DC, Acupuncturist or Massage Therapist is doing exams, evaluations, rendering treatment plans, monitoring progress and establishing prognosis without veterinary medical training and without DVM input and supervision. Is this correct? Another relevancy to the previous quote is that I would not attempt to do this in the human field and even I had some skill to contribute to human health care I would not be allowed to practice that skill unsupervised. These are all important questions and I think we all should think them over, if for nothing else than the goal of providing the best, most complete, most appropriate care for the veterinary reha

> > b patient.

> >

> > I am sure I have stirred the pot quite a bit with this dissertation but we have sort of danced around it for a long time and like most cross field relationships that have occurred in veterinary medicine, we crossed the field before establishing clear boundaries and rules. I don't want to exclude the PT from veterinary medicine but I think it is important for all of us on the rehab "team", the DVM, the PT and the LVT to all know our roles and limits. I sincerely believe that the PT is an important addition to the field of veterinary rehabilitation! I do not and would never presume to think because I have a CCRT that I am the equal of the PT in physical rehabilitation ("therapy" -- still ridiculous it cannot be called that), nor would I presume to think that I can handle a patient, draw blood, trim nails, etc… like that of an LVT. But nor should the PT or LVT presume that they should function in the role of the DVM. Sorry ahead of time if this angers anyone but I have nev

> > er been very good at sitting on my hands. If you believe this is inappropriate for the rehab list, please feel free to hurl insults directly to me on my email: mbparchman@

> > Have a great day!

> > Mark B. Parchman, DVM, DACVS, CVA, CCRT

> >

>

January 28, 2012

Steve,

<<<< " Where did all of you " cubbyholers " come from? " >>>>>>>

I am not understanding your comment nor the meaning of a " cubbyoler " ?

The fact that this is a multidisciplinary discussion group should be to its

benefit rather than its detriment. Your young and inexperienced interns and

residents no doubt gained from the experience of your technician and if they did

not that was their own fault. They had best not assume they automatically have

greater knowledge or insight simply because they have different initials

following their name!

The condescending manner, with which some on the listserv continue to pursue, is

detrimental to the group and the discipline. I respect the skills of PTs and

technicians and have enjoyed learning from both. I really don't think that the

DVMs that participate in this group believe there is some " secret handshake "

regarding our profession as you have stated. As a 32 year practicing

veterinarian I really see that mentality more from within our profession rather

than from the outside (i.e. - the young boarded specialist with very little if

any practice experience lecturing the experienced primary care provider on what

they can and cannot due).

Since I have probably made some mad already let me continue offering my

opinions. A number of years ago I became involved in a discussion with this

group that rapidly deteriorated to PTs vs. DVMs, it was eventually d/c by the

moderator. I removed myself from the group for a number of months before

participating again. When I returned I told myself I would not be involved with

such discussion again. I see this discussion moving in the same direction. I

spend far too much time participating in groups like this because I feel that it

has become a form of continuing education in my areas of interest. However, I

am currently faced with deadlines for 3 book chapters and preparation of 12

hours of presentations for February so I will make this my last post for awhile.

Of the professions that frequent this list, it is my opinion that the PTs are

the thinnest skinned and the quickest to remind others of the skills they

possess that others don't. I am sorry if that statement is upsetting to some

but it is truly how I feel. There have been a number of times where I have had

comments direct toward me or DVMs that I have purposely ignored to avoid

conflict. There have been comments made by some PTs that are just simply wrong

and lead me to question some of their knowledge and understanding of the

veterinary patient. If there are any " secret handshakes " within this group it

is PTs and their abilities and knowledge of manual therapies rather than

something the DVMs are hiding! It is the PTs that have tried to establish

boundaries of what professions should be doing within this discipline. Physical

therapy and the expertise that PTs bring to veterinary rehabilitation is

important and very much appreciated however, it is only a part of veterinary

rehabilitation. Critical review is an important aspect of any treatment,

modality, discipline, etc. and the role, expertise and modalities that PTs bring

to veterinary rehabilitation should be no different.

<<<<<<<<<< " I think that veterinarians do spend too much time protecting their

turf and it is the same with the PT's. " >>>>>>>>>>>>

We are both bound, ethically and morally to do so. The veterinary profession is

under attack from many directions. I am very involved in organized veterinary

medicine in Texas and serve on the board of directors of our state's VMA. In

the last few years we have dealt with issues, including legislation regarding

poorly trained lay equine tooth floaters, lay equine chiropractors and

unlicensed DVMs crossing our southern border and illegally setting up clinics

within our state. Texas chiropractors attempted to gain direct access to the

veterinary patient and all kinds of other service providers have attempted to

practice veterinary medicine without a license. In several states PTs have

attempted to gain direct access to the veterinary patient and in Colorado the

practice of physical therapy on animals is not considered the practice of

veterinary medicine and legislation directs it governance by the PT Board of

Examiners. So Steve, if some of us come across during discussions, such as

this, as having concern about those not formally trained in veterinary medicine

working on veterinary patients, I am of the opinion that it is founded. I know

and respect a number of PTs that have years of experience and continuing

education in veterinary rehabilitation but I also see PTs with pending

certification and limited if any experience profess a knowledge of this

discipline that DVMs and LVT/RVTs reportedly don't have. I am sorry, but that

really bothers me.

Thank you for your comments and I hope you accept mine as being formed with all

professional respect.

Rick Wall, DVM

January 28, 2012

Rick,

" In several states PTs have attempted to gain direct access to the veterinary

patient and in Colorado the practice of physical therapy on animals is not

considered the practice of veterinary medicine and legislation directs it

governance by the PT Board of Examiners. "

I think that it is important to note that the legislative change that occurred

in Colorado was not a move to take animal rehabilitation out of the realm of

veterinary practice. The legislative change did take place on the PT board's

side as it concerned the licensing and training of PT's only, but with the

assistance of (and encouragement from) both the Colorado VMA and the Colorado

Board of Veterinary Medicine. Since this change to the PT practice act in July,

2007, there have been exactly zero complaints, filed against PT's registered

with the CO Department of Regulatory Authorities (DORA), by veterinary

professionals or members of the public. Should a complaint be filed against a

PT, it would be directed to the PT Board of Examiners, but with the Veterinary

Board's notification. This practice act change is a far cry from 'direct

access', and this was never the intent of the bill.

Janet Van Dyke, DVM

Dipl. American College Veterinary Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation

CEO and Founder

Canine Rehabilitation Institute, Inc.

www.CanineRehabInstitute.com

Affiliate Faculty

Colorado State University

College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences

Janet.van_dyke@...

Director, International Veterinary Academy of Pain Management (IVAPM)

www.ivapm.org

Treasurer, American Association of Rehabilitation Veterinarians (AARV)

www.rehabvets.org

Chair, Residency and Credentials Committee

American College of Veterinary Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation (ACVSMR)

www.vsmr.org

> Steve,

>

> <<<< " Where did all of you " cubbyholers " come from? " >>>>>>>

>

> I am not understanding your comment nor the meaning of a " cubbyoler " ?

>

> The fact that this is a multidisciplinary discussion group should be to its