TBCE Scope of Practice Workshop Report

[Guest guest]

http://texasjournalofchiropractic.eznuz.com/article/Featured_News/Association_News/TBCE_Scope_of_Practice_Workshop_Report/24534

I don’t think this logic would fly here in Oregon. :

‘Board members and attendees shared their perspectives. One

of the key concepts stated by TBCE board members related to diagnosis. It was

stated by a board member that the doctor's " intention, as reflected by documentation, is what determines if

treatment is in or out of scope [of practice]. Diagnosis is reflective of

your intention for treatment. " The board member reflected

that if you are treating an organ you are outside your scope. If you are

treating a disease you are outside scope. " I don't want to argue about when does a dysfunction become a disease. "

Thus, while it is possible for a patient to have a myriad of

conditions/diseases, it is the viewpoint of

members of the TBCE that the diagnosis is that for which you intend to render

treatment. As the treatment protocols and scope of the chiropractic

profession are limited by legal statute, it is important that doctors of

chiropractic note that their diagnosis should be limited to that for which they

intend to render treatment. It is also important to note that current

members of the TBCE feel that treating an organ or treating a disease is

outside of scope. The committee discussed various types of

diagnosis--definitive, provisional, working, differential, and others--and is

working towards defining the diagnosis types used within the chiropractic

profession.’

s. fuchs dc