APT and the AARC

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

Moderators: SCNVsleep, labman2

APT and the AARC

Postby Rick » Fri Mar 21, 2003 5:38 pm

So, the AARC is actually having some sleep jobs legislated out of existence for anyone who does not hold a state health care license, in New Jersey right now. :shock: How soon until they try this in the remaining states? I think maybe the APT should speak seriously with the AARC about getting together because it seems obvious that the AARC has the lobbying clout to swing a big club on the state level and convince state legislatures that not having a state issued health care license means that those performing sleep studies right now are not qualified (try proving that we are, do any sleep labs/centers exist where each tech is registered?).

I tried to keep this short - any ideas along these lines? :idea: Am I a dreamer and should we all just give up? How can we save our jobs? :cry:
User avatar
Rick
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1384
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2003 8:42 pm
Location: Everett, WA

AARC and APT

Postby respbarb » Fri Mar 21, 2003 7:16 pm

It's my understanding that the APT has been working with the AARC, as they published a position paper together on the job description of a sleep tech. You are right that the AARC is stronger, it has more money from more members to lobby state legislatures to pass these laws.
Personally, I am not fearful for my job as I am already a liscensed RCP in my state. Only three of us in our lab has any credentials. Two of us are RCP"s and our supervisor is a RPSGT.
I don't think the state lawmakers will take jobs away from RPSGT's, but anyone without a credential, maybe. Can anyone from states were these laws are going into effect speak to this? Anyone from New York?
User avatar
respbarb
Moderator
 
Posts: 1418
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2003 5:05 pm
Location: Martinsville, VA

Postby muchadoaboutsleep » Sun Mar 23, 2003 8:37 pm

I too am very concern about the influx of influence the AARC has and would like to hear what is going on in other states. I'm in Texas and I hear not so nice things. No I don't think we should give up, become active. This is a profession and we need to be professional in what we need to do. Grassroot organizing in your own city. Put that lousy competition behind you and organize. :evil: :idea:
User avatar
muchadoaboutsleep
Member
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2003 3:55 am

Postby Rick » Mon Mar 24, 2003 8:25 pm

The APT has links to each state legislature at teir website so that you can easily listen in or give your opinion. This always works best when it is the state you are in as a citizen. The APT applied some pressure in the Wyoming case but it was pointed out that only one or two of the voices were from the state of Wyoming and now (okay, by July, I believe) you will have to have a state license as an RCP to do PSG or END (ElectroNeuroDiagnostic) testing. I put that parenthetical comment in because I always stumble on END and think it is over :wink: .

I have been doing some volunteer work for the APT Legislative Action Committee, it is not difficult and it is very much appreciated. Aren't all positions in the APT voluntary? They all have to do their jobs as well as run the organization, and you know how whiney we sleep people can get. :roll:

Gonna stop because I try to keep the posts short (too late?)
User avatar
Rick
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1384
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2003 8:42 pm
Location: Everett, WA

APT

Postby TexasSleepguy » Wed Apr 02, 2003 10:07 am

Many years ago when I started in sleep (1980s)-- RCP's didnt want anything to do with sleep. This was a Neuro position. I do not have a problem with RCP's in the field.I think each lab should have at least one. I just get angry about what seems to be a take over of sorts. RPSGT has always been considered a profession in our hospital and to tell you the truth Most PSG Techs make more than R.N's.
Just think about what all we do..
Neuro brainwave-
cardiac interpt.-
pneumo detection-
patient evaluation-
ACLS
PALS
Generate our own reports and tech interp of study which the MD just signs most of the time.
We are an elect group of people. we are self supporting and stuborn. Maybe this is why Sleep Techs fight so much we are all head strong because we have to be.

Up until the 90's Sleep tech had been self taught and New their jobs. I thank God we have schools now but those of us that came up the old way was kicking, screaming and scratching all the way.
User avatar
TexasSleepguy
Moderator
 
Posts: 594
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2003 5:05 am
Location: North Texas

Postby Rick » Wed Apr 02, 2003 4:27 pm

It wasn't that long ago, actually I think it is still the case that for a majority of the RTs, they don't want to get into Sleep Medicine. I think this is a political manuever by their organization to increase membership.

Perhaps we could use them to help us get state licensure and form a parrallel national organization?
User avatar
Rick
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1384
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2003 8:42 pm
Location: Everett, WA

Re: APT

Postby Bobzzz » Wed Apr 02, 2003 4:51 pm

[quote="TexasSleepguy"]RPSGT has always been considered a profession in our hospital and to tell you the truth Most PSG Techs make more than R.N's."

:shock:


More than RN's. That would'nt happen here. Not even if we had Master's degrees and 15 years experience apiece. It's nice to know that there are some facilities out there who pay according to the demands of the marketplace.
User avatar
Bobzzz
Member
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2003 7:05 am

APT vs. AARC

Postby Gulfstream » Tue Apr 08, 2003 1:37 pm

Folks it's time to get involved. What the AARC is trying to do is to force us to do things their way. I have been in the "Sleep Field" for a long time and have worked for both sides. (Respiratory / Neurology) I have found that the best group for doing sleep medicine are sleep technologist. Most Respiratory Therapist can't or don't want to titrate CPAP or BiPAP. In 2 different hospitals that I worked CPAP set-up for in-patients were done by Sleep Technologist. I can't remember how many times I have been called to a patients room to assist a RRT in setting up a CPAP on a patient. They are fantastic with a Vent, but CPAP is another story. I taught several classes on the different CPAP units that are out there to several different Respiratory departments. Alot of RRT feel that it is beneath them to do this task. I do not mean this to be derogatory, they just don't see it as important as a vent or ABG.

It is time to get involved, support the APT in their efforts. All it takes is some time and a little effort. Do not sit back and let the decision be made for you. Vote in the election for APT officers, let your voice be heard.
Gulfstream
New Member
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 12:44 pm
Location: North Carolina

Postby Rick » Tue Apr 08, 2003 6:17 pm

Yes, it is not the individual RT that wants to "DO" sleep, it is the AARC trying to politically ravage our profession. CPAP as initiated during a sleep study is not even performing respiratory therapy - as a post by someone at the APT website put it, CPAP is to improve SLEEP, not ventilation.

I have tried to see if anyone had any interest in this topic of the AARC vs the APT, that was why I started this thread. I also think that compromise can accomplish things. But the way this is turning out I think one of these organizations (don't want to openly antagonize the AARC) would only use a compromise disussion to properly position the stilletto for a quick plunge.

We have to participate in OUR professional organization: JOIN; VOLUNTEER; PARTICIPATE.

<This post edited by Sleepadmin. Text in red reflects changes made>
User avatar
Rick
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1384
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2003 8:42 pm
Location: Everett, WA

A Post at the APT

Postby Tech » Fri Apr 18, 2003 10:53 pm

I read a post at the APT site:

1) It was rude.

2) It was arrogant.

3) It was hogwash.

His opinion as to what CPAP does does not appear to be informed.

I do believe that sleep techs are largely people of exceptional aptitude, dedication and character. However there are too many techs who are in it just for the wages, because entry-level stadards for trainees is so low. The kitchen help or the maintenence man who can be tought by rote to collect PSG data, and finds him or herself doubling his income, is: a) unable to discern when things are not being done correctly, ill-equipped to make a proactive contribution to his/her program, and/or unwilling to "rock the boat" by pointing out problems to management for fear of losiing the "job." "Sleep on the Cheap" programs love these guys. Just shut up and crank the money machine, fella.

Because nobody, including the APT, and most egregiously, the ABSM, has made a huge stink about the fact that we have large numbers of uncredentialled personnel, particularly people who have no clinical background collecting data, messing with peoples pulmonary physiology, administering O2, etc., this situation is multiple. If you don't think this is true, just sample the posts made by patients on the Sleep Apnea Forum at Sleepnet, or read the posts there in the Sleep Technologist's Forum from techs who have had to leave their labs as a matter of conscience, or simply in disgust.

To claim that RCP's aren't interested in sleep does not reflect a thoughtful consideration of the issue. Rather, it smacks of the paranoia of someone who is minimally secure in his job, and fears that criteria for qualifying to do the work may be established that will put him/her below the bar.

The way I see it, in any population of people, the number who are willing to work long nights in a job that is more intellectually challenging than physically challenging, is very small. This goes for RCP's and everyone else. The overall tone of discussion coming from the APT, regarding the AARC is hostile, indicative more of self-interest than in the concern for patients. As such it continues to be devisive rather than constructive in our field of work.

As an RCP/RPSGT, I am dismayed by the way each of my organizations has approached the issue, and I have let them both know it. I really fault the ABSM for not demanding that criteria for defining the qualifications for persons who are conducting the studies that feed to them (the docs), are established (indeed, the ABSM should be clearly delineating what they regard as adequate standards for the people who conduct the studies). Leadership from the ABSM in this regard is woefully inadequate. The current vacuum in this regard encourages doctors who know little or nothing about sleep, and bottom-line-oriented institutions, to run sleep-on-the-cheap programs (medical director not sleep-trained, techs not sleep-trained) and get away with it. I believe that fraud is rampant in our field, in the absence of this structure. The intra-professional bickering among our numbers serves to protract this deplorable situation, and play into the hands of the corrupt.

Keeping in mind that what we do is for the benefit of patients, I would assert that it makes little difference who wins the turf war. What matters most is that personnel qualifications, lab standards, and protocols be established so that the quality of care is optimized.

I, personally, am ambivalent about who wins the "right" to call sleep "theirs." APT or AARC, either is a good fit. What is needed, is that a decision needs to be made ASAP. Until that happens, we will continue to have patients subjected to inadequate labs operated by incompetent personnel.

The way I see it, The designation RPSGT should be the minimum qualifier for sleep techs, and any tech trainee in the lab should be able to show that they are actively engaged in a program to become registered within a set interval to remain eligble to do the work of a PSG tech. I maintain that the best techs are RPSGT's who have other credentials of clinical practitioners, first amog them, the RCP's, and including RN's, REEGT's, RPhysical Ttherapists's, etc.

It is unfortunate to see the discord amongst our colleagues, yet the dialogue is important, if contentious, and is the path toward the resolution of this problem. A resolution that should be aimed not at "Protecting our profession," but aimed at protecting the patients we serve. And please, let us not speak of "POUNDING (things into) EVERY TECH'S HEAD."

<This post edited by Sleepadmin. Text in red reflects changes made>
User avatar
Tech
Member
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 2:58 pm
Location: Downeast Maine

Postby fanofcart » Sat Apr 19, 2003 10:41 am

Very good post, the previous one.

It has only been in the last couple of years that the APT has made any kind of movement towards a minimum entry-level set of criteria to get into the field.

The APT's policy has been, and is still somewhat, this: We don't want to go under Respiratory Care's licensure laws, but we aren't going to move to get ourselves licensed either. Well, licensure protects the public, and there are not too many allied health fields that are not licensed in most states. How many states have gotten sleeps technologists licensed in sleep (not in respiratory care)? Here in April of 2003, the answer is NONE.

And the AASM, they aren't hot and heavy for this either. Some physicians own their own labs, and they like having a ready stream of cheap workers.

And, as far as hospitals go, don't look for them to support licensure.
In many states hospitals have opposed licensure even for respiratory care professionals, because that would limit the number of people who could work in respiratory care and hence drive up salaries.

Like I said on a post on sleepnet.com, when I posted under the name "RPSGT and Proud of It," "We have met the enemy and it is us," to quote Pogo.
User avatar
fanofcart
Senior Member
 
Posts: 463
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 8:53 pm

Postby Tech » Sat Apr 19, 2003 1:47 pm

Good to see you, RPSGT and Proud of it. I love that quote.
User avatar
Tech
Member
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 2:58 pm
Location: Downeast Maine

APT and AARC

Postby respbarb » Sat Apr 19, 2003 3:56 pm

Excellently written posts, TECH. =D> Where do you live? I want you to come to our next sleep meeting and talk. You have well organized thoughts and definitely a lot to say that is important! :D
And thanks for reminding me out that we should all realize that the point is
to protect the patient.
As far as the AASM is concerned, I don't have any experiences with them, but working in hospitals for over 20 years I am well aware that MD's are notarious for NOT policing themselves.
They (majority I've worked with in 3 different states) many times are more worried about stepping on someone elses toes then protecting the patients.
They argue against cookbook medicine, but fail to realize that often this "third party regulator" results from pt's not being protected and practioners abusing the system.
User avatar
respbarb
Moderator
 
Posts: 1418
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2003 5:05 pm
Location: Martinsville, VA

APT Request for Eligibility Approved by CAAHEP Commissioners

Postby SleepyT » Wed Apr 23, 2003 4:54 am

APT Request for Eligibility Approved by CAAHEP Commissioners

Lenexa, Ks – April 17, 2003 – The Commission on Accreditation of Allied Healthcare Educational Programs (CAAHEP) approved the request of the Association of Polysomnographic Technologists (APT) to be eligible to participate in the CAAHEP system and to form a Committee on Accreditation for Polysomnography (CoAPSG) on Saturday, April 12, 2003 at the Annual Business Meeting held in St. Louis, Mo. In addition to the request for eligibility, the CAAHEP Commissioners approved the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) and the Board of Registered Polysomnographic Technologists (BRPT) as sponsoring organizations for the CoAPSG.

The formation of a CoAPSG will allow for the establishment of accredited educational programs for polysomnography that will standardize education and entry into the profession. Standards and Guidelines for schools wishing to apply for accreditation will be available in October 2003. The summer of 2003 will also mark the completion of standardized educational materials for teaching and assessing polysomnography, which have been developed by APT.

“This is a momentous occasion for the profession of polysomnography. Professional development has been a primary focus of the APT since 1978 and this accomplishment brings with it the realization of standardized educational programs critical to the future of our profession.” said Rose Ann Zumstein, APT President.

The Association of Polysomnographic Technologists is a non-profit international professional membership society whose mission is to advance the profession by representing members’ interests through education, advocacy and growth. The purpose of APT is to provide a voice for the professional who ensures the safe and accurate assessment and treatment of sleep disorders.

For more information contact, Sheila O’Neal, Executive Director @ (913) 541-1991.
User avatar
SleepyT
New Member
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 2:22 am
Location: PO Box 70, Mohnton, PA 19540

Postby Rick » Wed Apr 23, 2003 7:48 pm

Polysomnography Gets Own COA
April 15, 2003
AARC representatives attended a meeting of the Committee
on Accreditation for Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP) where polysomnography was the main issue of AARC interest.
At the meeting held April 10-12, CAAHEP recognized polysomnography as a separate health occupation, thereby paving the way to the formation of a Committee on Accreditation for free-standing polysomnography schools. The AARC followed this issue closely ensuring protection for the jobs of many respiratory therapists who are providing polysomnography services. AARC had opposed recognition of polysomnography as a separate profession, but with recognition as a health occupation the rights of RTs to perform sleep studies is preserved.
While polysomnography remains firmly entrenched in the respiratory care scope of practice, the AARC supported CAAHEP's move because the education of polysomnography technologists ran a wide-ranging gamut from OJT to weekend courses to Associate Degree programs. "We were very supportive of the Association of Polysomnographic Technologist's desire to have a committee on accreditation so that any free-standing schools could have consistent and quality standards," said Sam Giordano, who represented the AARC at the meeting.
Earlier in the meeting, CAAHEP approved an
AARC-initiated effort to add a CoARC standard allowing RT schools to add a polysomnography component if they so choose. CoARC is the respiratory care accrediting body for educational programs.
Also at the meeting, Greg Paulauskis, PhD, RRT, an AARC representative to CoARC, was elected to the CAAHEP Board of Directors. "We are proud when our representatives make this kind of impression and are recognized as leaders and contributors in the external community," said David Shelledy, AARC President.


What? Is this just some spin control or what? The AARC backs laws requiring personnel that perform PSGs to have state licenses as RCPs and now they say they are worried about loosing jobs if polysomnography is recognized as a separate profession? As if it was not separate and then why did they have to get approval to ADD polysomnography sections into RT schools?
User avatar
Rick
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1384
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2003 8:42 pm
Location: Everett, WA

Next

Return to AAST/AARC/ASET

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron