Q: RESNA needs to monitor its website much better. I would refer people to the website and the directory was down. Information about what to expect from individuals certified by RESNA was not clear. (anonymous)
A: RESNA launched its new website on June 15, 2008. The bugs are still to be shaken out. The new website will allow better access and resources for members and certificants, and the capability for individuals to edit and update information will be added to ensure that the website is current. Also, there will be automatic notifications for recertification, announcements, links for continuing education opportunities, and more. The directory of ATPs and ATSs also now show an “effective until” date for each certificant.
Q: Seating and mobility is not always wheeled mobility or wheelchair seating. There are numerous seating systems in schools. The certification is very confining. It has taken so long to gain recognition of the ATP that to change it is unbelievable. There is scant respect for the ATP in my job by my employer and now to change it seems to dilute its worth as a level of excellence. Too bad RESNA didn't campaign for more ATP presence in government issues. I have been urging APTA to recognize AT as a skill in physical therapy and now RESNA does this... (anonymous)
A: The ATP and ATS always have been general assistive technology certifications which test content in many areas of AT practice, including seating and wheeled mobility, seating and positioning. RESNA is making a focused effort to increase the visibility and value of your current (and a new single certification) and has employed a marketing firm to develop materials to assist with branding and promotion of the RESNA trademark designations. Any changes to the certification program would still recognize and test basic core knowledge in AT. The
Q: I believe that you have made an error in assumption. Until just a few years ago, the licensure of occupational therapists was made by their own professional organization and not by any governmental body. They had to lobby hard and campaign for curriculum changes to gain licensure in
A: You are correct. The field of AT is young, and one of the obstacles we are encountering is that AT is not significantly embedded in most curriculums. There is a level of rigor required and distinct body of knowledge to define before entertaining licensure for a profession. This has been successfully accomplished by the orthotics and prosthetics profession. When licensure is not a requirement, certification offers credibility and value, and that is the intent of the RESNA certifications in AT. There are many ATPs who practice within the field that are not licensed therapists but who do specialize in the area of AT. They work in many different practice settings, including the education system, vocational rehabilitation, independent living centers and workplace accommodation. A certification in AT has helped them to differentiate their specialty knowledge.
Q: The original vision of RESNA, way back when we began discussing the certification process 13 or 14 years ago was to eventually develop specialty exams for individuals who specialize in a particular area of practice when the time was right. The time became “right” when the LCD required that an ATS (or an ATP working for a supplier) be involved in the equipment selection process for certain power mobility devices. We expect this language to be included in a revision to the Manual Wheelchair policy as well as the Wheelchair Options and Accessories policy and the Wheelchair Seating policy in the future. The ATP language was removed from the policy due to strong lobbying efforts of the APTA and the AOTA and the realization by the CMS medical directors that an ATP certification was a generalist certification, not a specialty certification in seating and wheeled mobility. In fact, they questioned why there were two generalist certifications, which they saw as confusing and possibly misleading. Hence the consolidation – I think this is a move in the right direction and will clear up a lot of confusion related to roles and who can do what (anonymous).
A: The motivation for the PSB was to remove confusion caused when certification was tied to an individual’s role in the AT service delivery process. We are committed to increase the value of the basic level certification and have therefore engaged the services of a marketing firm to help increase the visibility and name recognition of the RESNA certifications. In addition, the reason for consolidation to a single certification is to make it stronger and more defensible, and to conform to accreditation standards for certification programs. For those specialty areas where it makes sense and there is demand and value to advanced certification, the PSB and Board of Directors of RESNA are committed to developing these certifications. The first specialty to be developed is in Seating and Mobility, with projected date of July 1 2009 for implementation.
Q: I believe that adding on more advanced certifications is ludacrist (sic). As a practicing occupational therapist for 10 years, I was happy to get my ATP. I do not think that I need an advanced certificate in seating and mobility to prove that I know my job. I went to school for 5 years and learned about seating and mobility. It is a core concept taught to occupational therapists. I think that the designations should remain the same and that RESNA should not create advanced certifications. I agree with the other bloggers who think that enough is enough. It seems that it has become more about money than the profession of AT. (anonymous)
A: An advanced certification is not necessary for everyone. The reason the basic certification exists is that it will meet the diverse needs of many practicing in different areas and settings in AT. Specialty certification comes at a significant expense to RESNA, without the volume of individuals that the basic certification provides. Therefore, it demonstrates a commitment of the
Q: I concur with Michelle Lange. I would like to see the potential specialty certification as an advanced practitioner in an area of practice, such as seating/mobility, AAC, computer access, etc. I am not a proponent of lumping the group of vendors with providers unless the vendor has passed the same exam as the provider demonstrating enhanced knowledge at the practitioner level. In addition, if the knowledge base of the two exams is so close, then maybe the practitioner exam needs to be brought up to a higher level (Matthew Press)
A: Essentially, the current test blueprint for both ATP and ATS exams are identical. The job analysis shows no distinction in basic AT knowledge between the two designations. Currently, 150 of the 200 items on both exams are common. Therefore, having one exam will allow us to test in greater depth AT application with more “real estate” for testing (50 items). The ATP and ATS exams were not designed to be hierarchical. It is the combination of educational training, on-the-job experience and passing the exam that demonstrates the higher level of knowledge.
Q: You make the assumption that all ATPs are therapists and subject to licensure. This is incorrect. Most of the Rehabilitation Technologists I know are not therapists. To have a single certification that covers both vendors and practitioners blurs the line between people the consumer can trust to have only their best interests in mind and people who have interest in influencing the consumer to purchase a certain brand of product. This negates the value of the certification as far as I am concerned and will make me think twice about renewing if the change is made. It costs too much to maintain the ATP certification for me not to feel that it gives my consumers reason to trust that I am not ONLY competent but ethically committed to finding the best product to suit their needs regardless of brand (Susan Levi).
A: We have many ATPs that are not therapists and are not licensed. When you pass either exam, you also commit to abiding by the RESNA Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice. The PSB has a process to handle complaints and take action against those who violate these standards, ranging from warning to revocation. It is the collective responsibility of the industry to raise the bar and to identify individuals who are not practicing according to the RESNA Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice. Unless a complaint is formally filed the PSB can take no action. Once a complaint is filed the
It is the mission of RESNA certification program to identify individuals who have demonstrated competency in an identified knowledge base. Certification is not to imply permission to perform a certain role. People change roles, and the certification then is misleading. The PSB explored the feasibility of converting certifications when an individuals’ role changes. We found that that was not a defensible method since there was not a bright line distinction between basic core AT knowledge for the ATP and ATS. The job analysis resulted in one common test blueprint. Although we find that different members of the AT team contribute different background and skills, the core AT foundation knowledge is the same. Without an identifiable difference, there is no defensible method for testing or converting a certification, and it becomes just a title.
Q: The problem with one exam is how to make a meaningful exam that someone with a GED or doctorate has the same core, entry level knowledge. This also does not address the problem I had in that the current ATP exam had very little in my area of physical therapy, seating & positioning. There was so much on speech & computer that passing it does little to ensure that a person can correctly determine wheelchair needs. I can see where advanced certification could come in here, but it does seem like a revenue generator. I'm having a hard enough time now wondering why I need the certification since Medicare withdrew the requirement for PTs. How does this fit in for the future since Medicare has continued to require certification for vendors? As for being designated CAT-please tell me you're kidding (Lynn Kelly PT, DPT, ATP).
A: The ATP and ATS certifications were designed to demonstrate basic core AT knowledge including but not limited to functional implications of disabling conditions, application of AT, legislation and funding, standards and ethics. Neither exam was designed specific to seating and wheeled mobility. Competency in basic AT knowledge enables AT professionals with different educational and practice backgrounds to communicate with persons with a disability and with each other, using a common language and understanding of disability and technology. Regardless of the area of practice, each individual involved in the recommendation of any assistive technology needs to be aware of other AT needs that impact upon the choices offered, and recognize when to refer elsewhere.
An advanced certification in the area of seating and mobility will enable those interested in distinguishing their knowledge in this content area. As mentioned earlier, specialty certification comes at a significant expense to RESNA, without the volume of individuals that the basic certification provides.
In the current Local Coverage Policy (LCD) for Power Mobility Devices, CMS has specified that the beneficiary must be evaluated by a licensed certified medical professional (LCMP) independent of the sale of the device. CMS already made a change to allow the supplier directly involved with the consumer in recommending the wheelchair to be either ATP or ATS-certified. In our discussions with the DME MAC Medical Directors for CMS, they have indicated that this change and the development of an advanced certification specific to seating and wheeled mobility would be in line with their own future direction.
The name of the new certification has not been finalized. There are several options on the table and the PSB is compiling all input for consideration.
No comments:
Post a Comment