Patient stories make the case

Erin L. Ransford

By Erin L. Ransford Research Capitol Hill Days present unique opportunity On Valentine’s Day, the AAOS delivered an important message to Capitol Hill: research funding to the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS) must be increased. It was a very personal message for the 34 patient advocates and 45 physicians and researchers who participated.

Ahead of the Curve

Issues facing America: Consumer-directed health care By Sharat Kusuma, MD; Ryan M. Nunley, MD; Aaron Covey, MD; James Genuario, MD; Samir Mehta, MD; and the Washington Health Policy Fellows Editor’s note: Throughout 2008, the “Ahead of the Curve” series by the Washington Health Policy Fellows will highlight various healthcare issues important to the national presidential election. To read previous columns, visit www.aaosnow.

Issues facing America: Consumer-directed health care

1 Goodman JC. What is consumer-directed health care? Health Aff (Millwood). 2006 Nov-Dec;25(6):w540-3. 2 Levit KR, Lazenby HC, Cowan CA, Letsch SW. National health expenditures, 1990. Health Care Financ Rev. 1991 Fall;13(1):29-54. 3 Blendon RJ, Benson JM. Americans’ views on health policy: a fifty-year historical perspective. Health Aff (Millwood). 2001 Mar-Apr;20(2):33-46. 4 Wilensky GR. Consumer-driven health plans: early evidence and potential impact on hospitals.

Orthopaedic patients, surgeons, researchers take part in Research Capitol Hill Days

Lindsay Law

On Feb. 13-14, 2008, the AAOS delivered a unique “valentine” to members of Congress…in the form of visits by their constituents—patients, orthopaedic surgeons, and orthopaedic researchers—as part of the annual Research Capitol Hill Days. They came to Washington, D.C., to meet with their senators and representatives to personally advocate for the future of musculoskeletal care and stress the importance of additional increased research funding.

Turning isolation into action

Frank B. Kelly, MD

“Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much”—Helen Keller In looking back upon the past 30 years and my involvement in my state society—the Georgia Orthopaedic Society (GOS)—I can see what a meaningful role this organization has played in my professional career. Frank B. Kelly, MD Back then—in 1978—the practice of medicine was quite different. Managed care was barely on the horizon; reimbursement for services was reasonable; expenses were not overwhelming.

Law journal publishes AAOS view on POPTS

The February 2008 issue of the American Bar Association’s The Health Lawyer included the article “Physician-provided physical therapy under attack: South Carolina rejects consensus in Sloan v. South Carolina Board of Physical Therapy Examiners.” Written by Grant Nyhammer, Esq.

Want to make a difference? Speak up!

Lindsay Law

Direct communication is key in influencing the legislative agenda Change cannot be achieved with only monetary contributions, former U.S. Rep. Nancy Johnson of Connecticut told attendees at the American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) Political Action Committee (PAC) luncheon held during the 2008 Annual Meeting. The first Republican woman appointed to the powerful House Ways and Means Committee and to serve as chair of the subcommittee on health, Rep.

Physician Provided Physical Therapy Banned in South Carolina

The South Carolina Supreme Court has ruled in Sloan v. South Carolina Board of Physical Therapy Sloan1 (“Sloan”) that the state’s Physical Therapy Practice Act2 (“Act”) prohibits physical therapists from working in a physician’s office and providing physical therapy to the physician’s patients through what are known as “in-practice referrals.” The decision has tremendous ramifications in that it changes how patients get physical therapy (i.e.

Physician Provided Physical Therapy Banned in South Carolina

1 Sloan v. South Carolina Board of Physical Therapy Sloan, 370 S.C. 452, 636 S.E.2d 598 (2006). 2 S.C. Code Ann. § 40-45-110(A)(1). 3 Sloan, 370 S.C. at 466, 636 S.E.2d at 605. 4 Id. at 465, 604. 5 Id. 6 The use of the term “Sloan” is a reference to the majority opinion only. References to the dissent will be noted. 7 S.C. Atty. Gen. Op. dated March 30, 2004, 2004 S.C. AG LEXIS 58. 8 See S.C. Code Ann. § 40-47-5 et. seq.