APT and the AARC

American Association of Sleep Technologists
..............
American Association for Respiratory Care
..............
American Society of Electroneurodiagnostic Technologists

Moderators: SCNVsleep, labman2

where do I send

Postby TexasSleepguy » Wed Jun 25, 2003 8:17 pm

Where do I find the information or names and addresses of those in the APT and state officials regarding this matter.
I did write to a couple of APT officials on the website and the email was bounced back.
User avatar
TexasSleepguy
Moderator
 
Posts: 594
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2003 5:05 am
Location: North Texas

Postby Deb_Shapiro » Tue Jul 01, 2003 8:48 am

The celebration may be a little late, but HURRAY for New Jersey! Why do people think they can practice medicine without an education/license? My respiratory school viewed polysomnography as a POST GRADUATE SPECIALIZATION - yes, requiring additional education/training beyond the RCP. So if you poly techs out there want to save your jobs; go to school. Or at the very least - take the test and get your license.
Deb_Shapiro
New Member
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 2:18 am

Ed.

Postby Guest » Tue Jul 01, 2003 2:24 pm

Deb,

The concern I have is that about 14 years ago when I started in sleep RCP's didnt want anything to do with sleep. We were all R.EEGT's and were a neuro sub specialty. Apnea is only a small part of Polysomnography. Now after all these years Resp. are getting ivolved and wanting to run the show.
It just so happens that I am starting school for Resp. Therapy but, I do not feel it will make me any more qualified to do sleep studies. Maybe a degree in Psychology or nursing would be more of what a Poly Tech needs.
Guest
 

Postby Bobzzz » Tue Jul 01, 2003 3:06 pm

But this is what happens when we go merrily along for years pretending that a 1 or 2 week training school qualifies someone to work in sleep. Then taking only a written exam for the registry. All this need not have happened if more of a push were made to encourage the development of AAS programs specific to Sleep. Yes, there are always going to be turf wars in medicine. But the AARC is doing what the APT should've done long ago, that is erect barriers of entry, thereby giving the public a reasonable assurance that the person doing a PSG is fully trained and knows what they're doing.
User avatar
Bobzzz
Member
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2003 7:05 am

Postby sleep for thought » Tue Jul 01, 2003 10:34 pm

Whoa Guest- There is a lot more to Respiratory Therapy than Apnea in running a sleep study especially in a more critical patient. You have oxygen titration, hypoventilation due to emphysema and obesity, blood gases.

Don't get me wrong I think that Respiratory needs to butt out and let Polysomnograpy run itself. Being educated in Respiratory Therapy definitely enhances your handling of a sleep study especially in a more critical patient .
sleep for thought
Member
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 2:41 am
Location: Rocky Mountains

Postby Showmesleep » Wed Jul 02, 2003 5:39 am

No way, Deb. My job is secure and always will be, even if I had not gone to school for this. There's so much more than sleep apnea out there!
Yeah, go to school if you want to be a PSG Tech, but don't go to an RT school and expect to know it all, go to a PSG school.
Yeah, blood gasses are helpful, but even I can do blood gasses, and I'm not a RCP.
And when taking the board exam, isn't there some way to incorporate the oral/practical portion into the written exam? I think we should make the written test much harder. I found practical/oral testing to be VERY EASY so therefore a waste of time and money. Isn't there some way we can test technologist's competancy without making them shell out the $$ and take two tests?

Afterthought: I apologize for getting so testy. I'm just sick and tired of the AARC thing.
User avatar
Showmesleep
Member
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:19 pm
Location: Missouri

APT management group (X-File) questions

Postby swserp » Tue Nov 18, 2003 7:05 am

Does APT still contract with AMP in Lenexa for its management consulting and operations management? Who is AMP, and why would anyone ask?

http://www.goamp.com/about_us.htm
Applied Measurement Professionals, Inc. (AMP) is a private, stock corporation located in the greater Kansas City Area. AMP has extensive experience in research, testing, measurement, management, communications, publishing and technology, and we currently offer a wide variety of professional services to our clients. AMP has conducted more than 200 job analysis studies over the past 20 years and we annually assess more than 200,000 candidates (nationally and internationally) for the 60 plus credentialing organizations we serve. AMP has the resources to control all aspects of design, production and distribution, while being responsive, flexible, cost effective, time efficient and providing absolute security of all data and records. AMP was incorporated in the state of Kansas in 1982 as a wholly owned subsidiary of the National Board for Respiratory Care, Inc. (NBRC).

Might the nationally mushrooming restrictive practice legislations have been easier to spot, address and counter-lobby before laws were enacted if APT's radar had been aimed differently for the past 10 years? Was the AMP subsidiary of the National Board of Respiratory Care able to provide APT with helpful insights or perspectives while respiratory care legislation was being lobbied throughout the country? Does the AMP subsidiary of the National Board of Respiratory Care have a seat on the APT Board (is there an Executive Director)? Has APT ever polled its membership to guide management group selections, fees or renewals?

In 2003, after the fact, no one can say for sure how the sprout of restrictive legislations might have turned out differently. However, management questions have been longstanding. No one can know, as well, how APT membership involvement in management contracting decisions might have altered the legislative path to our unfortunate present. Hopefully, an APT with a fresh perspective might finally put such topics out for the membership to discuss, or even vote on. It is not too late.

The absurdity of practice restrictions that reach to include neurodiagnostic studies in the scope of respiratory care offers hope that some legislatures might be convinced to revisit the ways their opinions were developed. One can imagine some legislators feeling embarrassed, or perhaps even snookered into supporting such laws.

If APT can muster new opportunities to fight and correct such misguided over-reaching, one can only hope the AMP subsidiary of the National Board of Respiratory Care forcefully presents sleep's long history of safe and effective patient care delivered by sleep technologists in protocols developed and supervised directly by physicians, as remains current practice.

Sometimes hope is not enough. Sometimes it is necessary to depend on oneselves. Maybe sometime very soon. Ask some questions.
User avatar
swserp
New Member
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 4:47 am
Location: Long Island, NY

Postby sleep for thought » Tue Nov 18, 2003 10:21 am

I think the AMP is an organization that administers and oversees the testing procedures for different health care professions. Coincidently both respiratory and sleep professions use there services?

Swserp- I'm not exactly sure where you are going with your post but by the looks of your line of questioning I'd be interested in what your opinion is on the matter?
sleep for thought
Member
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 2:41 am
Location: Rocky Mountains

Ahem....Tech?

Postby zleeper » Fri Nov 21, 2003 8:33 pm

You claim to think you have "the answer" to this pressing problem, namely discussion. But in effect discussion IS the problem, especially when it involves the AARC and any targe they have in their sights. The doctors you are referring to are mostly pulmonaologists, so tht counters your point of the greedy practitioner wanting his stupid techs run studies. You make the case for better managment not using unqualified, though licensed" caregivers extending their scope of practice to include something that they had no interest in when they wrote their scope of practice.
You have to be one of the resp people who realized you have to get sleep educated by sleep individuals to do sleep medicine, because your resp training gave no tools or skills to perform the tests you say resp is "licensed to perform." All a lisence is a notification to the state that you intend to perform a procedure and that you have paid whatever fee, and have abided in whatever training they deem needed to do those procedure. Just because a licensed scope of practice has at its core the usage of a modality or similar, though more intrusive treatment regimen that that which is to performed in sleep, does not automatically make you qualified to do all the other aspects of the procedure. As a patient it is scarrier for me to have a qualified person performing a procedure, irrespective of a license, than an unqualified licensed individual performing the procedure.

The AARC can't be trusted. Too many in that organization have too many fingers in the pie. , RTs, do studies, score studies, run DMEs, place CPAP, and are only the ones capapble of doing compliance too. I think not.
Especially since they need sleep people to train them on what to do.
User avatar
zleeper
Member
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2003 4:07 am

Enough is too much!!!!!!!!!

Postby Ted the Sleep Guy » Sat Nov 22, 2003 7:37 pm

I have tried to avoid commenting on this issue because it is sensitive and inflammatory. BUT---enough is too much!!!!!!!!!!!!

To Rick-- The AARC is not trying to RAVAGE the profession. They are trying to license and thereby legitimize the profession. They are trying to upgrade a situation which overlaps with Respiratory Care.

We really have to examine the past to be able to see our destination for the future. My history goes back to the days when Resp Care was filled with OJTs. It sucked. Credentials were optional, and a license was non- existent. The AARC fought for many years to establish standards for RCP education programs. Formal medical education programs improved the ability and standards of RC. This led to a movement which spent years of time and effort and dollars to lobby for licensure on a state by state basis. Today no one can practice RC without minimum education, minimum credentials, and a license. This insures by law, your state recognizes your profession and your abilty to practice that profession. This is the evolution of a profession. Without mandatory education, credentials, and a license; it is not a profession. It is an occupation. There is a difference. Would you want a doctor without a license practicing medicine or surgery on you? Is it OK for a nurse without a license to hang blood on a pt? Would you want an unlicensed pharmacist dispensing meds? How about an X-ray tech exposing you to radiation without licensure? Why should our profession of Polysomnography be less legitimate?

The days of the OJT are soon coming to an end, as well it should. It is the evolution of our profession. If you can't read the writing on the wall you are blind. This is not a bad thing, it is good.

In reference to the posts dated 4-18-03 by TECH, I couldn't agree more. I also think FANOFCART on 4-19-03, and RESPBARB were right on the mark as well.

To the many sleep docs---SHAME ON YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!! You have a license, a specialty and a sub specialty. This has enabled you to earn a very fat income. Yet you have the unmitigated gall to stand in the way of those polysomnographers that ask for educational and legal standards. Why??????? You have them. Could it be because you may have to pay us more? You may have to come across with an extra $50,000 per year to pay for a staff which is legally recognized as competent? Just as you are legally recognized? You have earned a portion of your income by keeping your foot on the back of the necks of Polysomnographers. The extra $10,000/yr for a licensed RCP allows for an infinitely higher standard than existed 30 yrs ago. As it will be with Polysomnography.

Shame on the APT for being in bed with these sleep docs. The APT now feels the threat of licensure and its subsequent legitimacy at their throats. This is what prompts them to cooperate in establishing minimum standards for education. They never took an interest previously. If it weren't for AARC pressure, the APT would continue to collect dues from members while doing nothing for them in terms of advancement.

The RPSGT is a credential I hold dear. I am vey very proud to have achieved it. No one gave me anything. I broke my ASS reading everything I could beg, borrow, and steal. I hoped it would help me to pass my boards. It did. I wish I had the benefit of a formal polysomnograhic education to pave the way for me. Not a 3 week course, but a real formal education in the profession.

Those people that are RPSGT deserve legal status as true professionals. They deserve the financial status that accompanies it as well; just as MDs, RNs and RRTs. The best thing that could happen to Polysomnography is to be recognized as a true licensed and legally legitimate profession. Licensure for RPSGTs as a sub specialty of Resp Care is good. It's good for the profession. It's good for the sleep centers. It's good for the Polysomnographers. Most important it's good for the public.

I am going to stop now because my fingers hurt.
User avatar
Ted the Sleep Guy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2003 8:28 pm
Location: Long Island, NY

Postby me2sleepy » Wed Nov 26, 2003 12:33 pm

I couldn't have said it better myself!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D
User avatar
me2sleepy
Member
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2003 9:34 pm
Location: WA state

Postby bob » Fri Nov 28, 2003 11:16 pm

Where does the AASM stand in all this? They seem to have resisted requirements to have RPSGT's on staff for many years - or is this correct? I have seen the AARC movements as threatening - and perhaps they are but perhaps they will succeed where the APT - with alldue respect - has failed. Perhaps this is because they have more muscle to push through the needed changes?
bob
Senior Member
 
Posts: 319
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 1:44 pm
Location: Scandinavia

Postby Mandy » Mon Dec 01, 2003 1:25 am

I'm not sure where the AASM stands in all this or if they are even taking a stand at all. It seems to me that this is a state-by-state licensing issue.

I've recently heard through the grapevine that the board of medicine for the state of Idaho has passed a new licensure law re: sleep techs. Is all I've heard so far is that one must have a current respiratory care license OR a polysomnography license to work in the sleep field. I'm trying to find out what the requirements are for a psg license.

If anyone has any more information, please post it here. There are changes in the wind with this field and I'm sure I'm not the only one who is a little confused as to what's going on exactly. :-k

I found this info on the Idaho board of medicine website:

The Idaho State Board of Medicine has suggested that some
sleep disorder clinic or laboratory personnel (polysomnographers)
have been practicing respiratory therapy without a license. The
purpose of this legislation is to provide for the issuance of
limited permits to some polysomnographers allowing them to
continue to perform their limited scope of duties in the field of
respiratory therapy without becoming licensed as full-fledged
respiratory therapists. The legislation provides qualifications
for permits, including educational requirements, and places
polysomnographers under the direction of the respiratory therapy
licensure board, a board under the direction of the Idaho State
Board of Medicine.
User avatar
Mandy
Friend of binarysleep
 
Posts: 1284
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 3:06 pm

Postby Keith » Mon Dec 01, 2003 4:50 am

I agree Ted, that licensure is good for the profession. I disagree that the AARC needs to have their hand in it. I am not a respiratory therapist. My significant other is. I know far more about sleep than she does although she is learning. We both agree that polysomnography is more an offshoot of EEG than respiratory therapy. Personally, I resent the AARC trying to force us under thier umbrella. Yes, we do a couple of things that overlap, but we are no more a part of respiratory therapy than respiratory therapy is a part of nursing. And most of you RTTs out there know that nursing would love to get their hooks into respiratory. At some hospitals respiratory reports to nursing.

I would like to see polysomnography emerge as it's own entity with proper licencing for all technicians. I'd also like to see polysomnography programs become more common in schools, particularly here in the southwest.
Keith
Moderator
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 10:32 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Postby Showmesleep » Tue Dec 02, 2003 5:00 pm

I don't think anyone will ever get the last word when it comes to this topic. :)

I agree, Keith.

My thoughts are: let's not forget that sleep is not all about Respiratory. I wouldn't want some EKG society to come in and say, 'hey...you're recording some EKG abnormalities, you had better be a certified EKG tech to record Polys', or 'hey, those are PLM's...so you'd better be an REDT before you can run sleep studies.'

I agree that OTJ is coming to an end. Some day RT's and EEGT's are going to have to go to school before entering into the field.
However, don't most RT's do OTJ like EEG techs do? I don't think they cover much sleep in RT school.
User avatar
Showmesleep
Member
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:19 pm
Location: Missouri

PreviousNext

Return to AAST/AARC/ASET

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest