POST#4: JUNE 20, 2008

Q: I agree with the comment on continuing education certificate classes instead of examinations. The ATP exam experience taught me nothing new whereas the certificate program in assistive technology from University at Buffalo taught me a great deal. This credential had been a goal of mine for the 3 years it took me to have enough experience time to take the test. However, taking the test made no difference on how I work with patients and determine needs. Whereas continuing education always curbs my knowledge base which allows more informed choices for patients.


A: The RESNA certification is intended to identify individuals who have a combination of education, AT work experience and demonstrated competency in basic AT knowledge. We agree that a certification program is very different from a certificate program. The latter is designed to be educational. At the completion of a certificate program students usually take a test – usually one of the following - a knowledge test, skills based practicum, or portfolio review. Upon successful completion of the curriculum and course requirements students are awarded a certificate of completion. RESNA will consider different venues for demonstrating competence in a specialty area in AT, including establishing certificate programs as there is interest and demand.

Q: In response to the PT's comment on the exam ... The ATP exam I took was equally divided between seating and wheeled mobility, augmentative communication, and computer access. This is not fair to physical therapists, speech therapists, and non-therapists. It seemed clearly geared to occupational therapists more so than any other field. Did you look at by profession who has a higher pass rate? This might give you more data than trying to compare apples to oranges between DME providers and practitioners. It hasn't ever made logical sense why 3/4 of the exam between the two exams is the same. The answer is not to make it all one exam but instead to clearly differentiate the two exams with questions that meet the needs of each type of role. People who switch back and forth in their careers should be able to clearly see a difference in their roles through the certifications and see the value in their chosen separate career paths.

A: The current ATP and ATS exams were created based upon a job survey that was distributed widely to individuals working in all areas of AT. The job analysis or results of the job survey was the basis for the ATP and ATS test blueprint that dictates the test content domains and number of items needed for each domain. Therefore the ATP and ATS exams were designed to reflect general AT practice and were not created to favor one profession or area of AT practice.

It is not the intent of a certification program to qualify an individual to perform a specific role. Tying our certifications to specific roles (practitioner and supplier) has caused confusion as people change employment and roles, though the original intent was to help the public identify who could provide what services. A voluntary certification should not be tied to specific roles, and our research and discussion with our consultants verifies that other programs use certification to identify competence in a core knowledge base, while regulations define who can perform what role. This is why in other fields, once a certification is earned, it can still be retained if the eligibility requirements are still met for renewal (i.e. continuing education), even when the person is not practicing or changes employment. It is the duty of the PSB to ensure that the RESNA certification program only claims what it is and does not overstate what a certificant is able to do. This is the motivation for the move to one basic level AT certification.

Q: I have concerns about blurring the line between a vendor and a practitioner. Consumers and funding sources need to know that a professional therapist is making a recommendation without conflict of interest. Using the same credential will make the distinction less clear. I do support specialty certification, as we cannot possibly be competent in all the areas of AT

A: This is another reason to move towards establishing a single certification. Funding sources will know when a qualified therapist is making a recommendation from their license to practice as well as the certification. The current lines get blurred when a therapist changes employment to work for a supplier. To then keep the ATP is confusing because it implies a role and an independent assessment with no financial ties to a recommendation.

Q: Why Now? Medicare has made ATS & ATP the gold standard for our industry just recently! ATP staff employed by hospitals that have deep pockets will be fine. I think all ATS staff should ask their home health companies how committed they are to staying in wheeled mobility with competitive bidding or, 9.5% Medicare allowable cut across the board facing them. We all know the hidden cost of providing complex rehab. I know of 2 companies in my area that have stopped providing complex rehab already.
Don’t put one more straw on the camel’s back at this time. Give competitive bidding or the upcoming slash to allowable to be fully digested. This will hurt smaller HME companies that currently provide excellent complex rehab equipment and their customers who depend on their service. The waters are turbulent and we don’t need our own industry adding to the stress. Please read these posts of concern and keep an open mind… This is a great idea but, NOW IS NOT THE TIME.

A: We do not propose to make this change without transferring current successful certificants to the new designation without charge, so there is not an additional financial burden or stress. The goal is not to put undue burden, but rather to simplify and reduce confusion. We agree that this is an especially difficult period in the industry, with competitive bidding as well as policy changes. Smaller companies would not be affected by a change in certification, though competitive bidding will affect many businesses significantly. RESNA is involved in the industry effort to minimize the effects of competitive bidding and to carve out complex rehab.