Physical Therapy, Occupational Therapy, and Speech Language Pathology in the Emergency Department

Author(s):  
Elizabeth A. Pontius ◽  
Robert S. Anderson
1992 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 203-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Godden ◽  
Ann Bossers ◽  
Donna Corcoran ◽  
Daniel Ling ◽  
Sally Morgan

2015 ◽  
Vol 95 (12) ◽  
pp. 1638-1649 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Amico ◽  
Gregory C. Pope ◽  
Poonam Pardasaney ◽  
Ben Silver ◽  
Jill A. Dever ◽  
...  

Background A Medicare beneficiary's annual outpatient therapy expenditures that exceed congressionally established caps are subject to extra documentation and review requirements. In 2011, these caps were $1,870 for physical therapy and speech-language pathology combined and $1,870 for occupational therapy separately. Objective This article considers the distributional effects of replacing current cap policy with equal caps by therapy discipline (physical therapy, occupational therapy, and speech-language pathology) or a single combined cap, and risk adjusting the physical therapy cap using beneficiary characteristics and functional status. Methods Alternative therapy cap policies are simulated with 100% Medicare claims for 2011 therapy users (N=4.9 million). A risk-adjusted cap for annual physical therapy expenditures is calculated from a quantile regression estimated on a sample of physical therapy users with diagnoses and clinician assessments of functional ability merged to their claims (n=4,210). Results Equal discipline-specific caps of $1,710 each for physical therapy, occupational therapy, and speech-language pathology result in the same aggregate Medicare expenditures above the caps as 2011 cap policy. A single combined-disciplines cap of $2,485 also results in the same aggregate expenditures above the cap. Risk adjustment varies the physical therapy cap by as much as 5 to 1 across beneficiaries and equalizes the probability of exceeding the physical therapy cap across diagnosis and functional status groups. Limitations One limitation of the study was the assumption of no behavioral response on the part of beneficiaries or providers to a change in cap policy. Additionally, analysis of risk adjusting the therapy caps was limited by sample size. Conclusions Equal discipline-specific caps for physical therapy, occupational therapy, and speech-language pathology are more equitable to high users of both physical therapy and speech-language pathology than current cap policy. Separating the physical therapy and speech-language pathology caps is a change that policy makers could consider. Risk adjustment of the therapy caps is a first step in incorporating beneficiary need for services into Medicare outpatient therapy payment policy.


2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren Peranich ◽  
Kristen B. Reynolds ◽  
Shirley O'Brien ◽  
Joni Bosch ◽  
Tamara Cranfill

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (S1) ◽  
pp. 56-63
Author(s):  
Brianne Mooney ◽  
Cecelia Lawrence ◽  
Elizabeth Gerosa Johnson ◽  
Amanda Slaboden ◽  
Karen Ball

Abstract Background Up to 36% of patients admitted to the ICU for COVID-19 require tracheostomy. While the literature recommends the use of multidisciplinary teams in the management of patients with tracheostomy for other diseases, little is known on the collaborative administration of physical therapy and speech language pathology services in the COVID-19 population. Purpose We sought to determine the outcomes of a collaboration between physical therapy (PT) and speech language pathology (SLP) in the treatment of patients who underwent tracheostomy placement as part of their treatment for COVID-19 at our facility. Methods We conducted a retrospective case series on patients with COVID-19 who had a tracheostomy. We included patients who had undergone mechanical ventilation for 14 days or longer, had a surgical tracheostomy, been discharged from intensive care to a medical unit, and received PT and SLP referrals. We compiled retrospective data from electronic medical records, analyzing days from tracheostomy to achievement of PT and SLP functional milestones, including mobility, communication, and swallowing. Of six critically ill patients with COVID-19 who had tracheostomy placement at our facility, three met inclusion criteria: patient 1, a 33-year-old woman; patient 2, an 84-year-old man; and patient 3, an 81-year-old man. For all patients, PT interventions focused on breathing mechanics, secretion clearance, posture, sitting balance, and upper and lower extremity strengthening. SLP interventions focused on cognitive reorganization, verbal and nonverbal communication, secretion management, and swallowing function. Intensity and duration of the sessions were adapted according to patient response and level of fatigue. Results We found that time to tracheostomy from intubation for the three patients was 23 days, 20 days, and 24 days, respectively. Time from tracheostomy insertion to weaning from ventilator was 9 days for patient 1, and 5 days for patient 2 and patient 3. Regarding time to achieve functional PT and SLP milestones, all patients achieved upright sitting with PT prior to achieving initial SLP milestone of voicing with finger occlusion. Variations in progression to swallowing trials were patient specific and due to respiratory instability, cognitive deficits, and limitations in production of an effortful swallow. Patient participation in therapy sessions improved following establishment of oral verbal communication. Conclusion Interdisciplinary cooperation and synchronized implementation of PT and SLP interventions in three COVID-19 patients following prolonged intubation facilitated participation in treatment and achievement of functional milestones. Further study is warranted.


Author(s):  
Randy McCombie ◽  
Hannah Slanina

Purpose: This research was designed to serve as a pilot study to generate baseline data on non-medical use of prescription drugs (NMUPD) for cognitive/academic enhancement purposes among students representing two healthcare professions, Occupational Therapy (OT) and Speech Language Pathology (SLP) and to assess students’ opinions regarding whether use of these medications constitutes academic “cheating.” Introduction: NMUPD, such as Adderall ® or Ritalin ®, to reduce fatigue, improve memory, and increase concentration to ultimately improve grades has increased among college students in recent years, with estimated use put as high as 35% on some campuses. These drugs appear to be readily available to those not prescribed them, with primary sources including family, friends, and classmates. Aside from health concerns stemming from ingesting non-prescribed medications is the ethical concern whether use of such cognitive enhancers is “cheating.” Methods: Following IRB approval, 150 OT and 150 SLP students, randomly selected from membership in their respective national associations, were mailed survey packets containing a cover letter, questionnaire, and return envelope. Results: A total of 51 completed surveys, including 25 OT and 26 SLP students, were returned and included in analyses. Of these, five (9.8%) reported using cognitive enhancing prescription medications. Four of these reported having a legal prescription, including one who admitted faking symptoms of ADHD to access the prescription. The fifth student had no prescription. Motives included recreational enjoyment, to improve attention/concentration, reduce hyperactivity/impulsivity, and to obtain higher grades. Four out of ten students indicated abuse of prescription medications was a problem at their institutions, with three out of ten believing it was easy to obtain such drugs. Students were visibly divided as to whether use of these medications was academic cheating. Conclusions: The percent of these healthcare profession students reporting to have used non-prescribed medications for academic enhancement purposes mirrors that of studies on the general college student population and reflects the division as to whether use constitutes cheating. As the survey is a self-report, the numbers using the prescription medications may be higher. Results indicate future research on NMUPD among healthcare students is warranted, along with a need to educate students on the risks of use of these medications for non-prescribed purposes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document