ASEPNewsletterFebruary2005.html

ARTICLES

DEPARTMENTS

February BOD Editorial
"Let's Be Clear"
Lehn, M.

JEPonline
Assessment Of The Ergogenic Properties Of Creatine Using An Intermittent Exercise (manuscript three on page)
Havenetidis, K.

PEPonline
Accreditation
Boone, T.

Contact Information
New web page (click) and new email address: contact@asep.org

Important Dates to Remember!
ASEP Annual Meeting Schedule & EPC Exams!
The Editors - NEW Schedule Info.!

New PowerPoint: Why Join ASEP?
Click above to download presentation
The ASEP Board of Directors

Ask the Professor
Have Your Question Appear Online!
with Dr. Don Diboll

Over the past several years, there have been many statements made about the American Society of Exercise Physiologists. Many of these comments being made are inaccurate. What ASEP is trying to do is hard enough, but misinformation is making the challenge even greater. This is a brief attempt to clear up some of the most frequent comments made inaccurately about ASEP.

The Board is saturated with mostly people in education. They dont represent those of us in the trenches.
The ASEP Board of Directors is comprised of Exercise Physiologists with a variety of backgrounds and work settings. Half of the current board holds a Masters or Bachelors degree. They work in areas such a Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation, Wellness and other clinical and non-clinical areas. ASEP believe that all students that graduate with a degree in Exercise Physiology are Exercise Physiologists, and want a board that reflects that. Additionally, since many of the current issue facing Exercise Physiologists are related to those working with patients/clients, it only makes sense to have a board representative of its members and their struggles.

ASEP needs to work with other organizations.
ASEP has worked with other organizations and will continue to do so. ASEP has worked with organizations such as American Kinesiotherapy Association and the National Athletic Trainers Association. ASEP was part of a coalition with a dozen organizations that has opposed CMS attempt to limit reimbursement to services provided only by Physical Therapists, Speech Therapists, and Occupational Therapists. ASEP will continue to work with other organizations that have a common interest in protecting our profession.

ASEP needs to stop bashing ACSM and work with them.
ASEP is not bashing ACSM, we are simply pointing out differences. For instance, the mission of ASEP is different than that of ACSM. ASEPs mission is to further the profession of exercise physiology. ACSMs is practical applications of exercise science and sports medicine. This is done through many disciplines and professions, not just one.

Even some of the core beliefs are different. ASEP believes a necessary next step in furthering the profession of Exercise Physiologists is licensure or state regulation. More than 90% of Exercise Physiologists feel that they need state regulation in order to gain some of the advantages their peers have in nursing, physical therapy, occupational therapy, and others. ASEP fulfills important legal and legislative criteria for the present and future development and growth of the profession. ASEP is the only organization that meets this criterion.

ACSM has stated their opposition to licensure. This isnt surprising. Their membership is mostly made up of professionals other than Exercise Physiologists. It is those other professions that oppose licensure, feeling they would lose some of the ground that they monopolize. Even when the government attempts to change regulations to limit reimbursement, organizations such as ACSM and AACVPR are not found fighting for Exercise Physiologists. There multidiscipline membership creates a conflict, precluding them from taking a stand on behalf of exercise physiologists.

ASEP has attempted to work with ACSM in the past. For numerous reasons, these attempts have been unsuccessful. But to say that ASEP refuses to work with ACSM or that ASEP does not have allies is false.

We do not need an exclusive professional organization.
If history has taught us anything, it is that a profession must have an exclusive organization to oversee the development of a profession. Attempts for licensure have been stalled in the past because states used a multidisciplinary organization as their professional organization. Every organization that has successfully obtained licensure and the infrastructure that comes with it (code of ethics, accreditation, etc) has done so through an exclusive professional organization. This includes every profession that exists in ACSM and AACVPR. Any suggestion that a multidisciplinary organization can achieve regulation for a profession goes against history and holds no merit.

ASEP was born out a frustration with ACSM.
ASEP was born out of the fact that the profession of Exercise Physiology was neglected in many areas. For nearly 50 years, no other organization stepped up to defend and organization the profession. Basic elements that are required for a profession where never put in place. Many in the field were leaving due to poor job security, low pay scales, and a multitude of other reasons. Just as AACVPR was born out of ACSM to serve the need of those in Cardiac and Pulmonary Rehabilitation, ASEP was created to serve the needs of Exercise Physiologists. This is how all new organizations are born, by serving a need not currently being met.

There will always be doubters and skeptics, especially when we discuss an issue that so many feel passionate about. The American Society of Exercise Physiologists is working hard to unite exercise physiologists. ASEP will continue to work hard in taking the steps needed to ensure a positive future for our profession.

Q.) Could you explain the difference between a Clinical Exercise Physiologist and a Physical Therapist?

Thanks again,
John Heiderich

A.) There is much more to this question than one would first think. From a simplistic perspective, a somewhat knowledgeable layperson might say that an exercise physiologist is one who tests/ evaluates fitness and designs and conducts exercise programs to improve and/or maintain fitness. A clinical exercise physiologist might be described similarly, with the exception that this type of exercise physiologist would typically work in a more clinical setting with individuals who need direct supervision due to their medical condition (e.g. cardiac patients). A physical therapist, on the other hand, would likely be described as one who rehabilitates individuals with musculoskeletal injuries as well as conducts rehabilitation programs for post-surgical patients (e.g. reconstructive knee surgery).

From a more specific, more relevant point of view, the differentiation between an exercise physiologist and a physical therapist in terms of what they do is not as clear. In many instances today, you will find both types of professionals working in both capacities described above. What truly defines an exercise physiologist or a physical therapist is each professions scope (or standards) of practice. Physical therapists have a well-defined scope of practice that specifically identifies what they can (and cannot) do. The physical therapist's professional identity is enhanced further in that physical therapists are licensed (within their respective states) to perform services within their scope of practice. This system has been in place for decades. On the other hand, exercise physiologists have, unfortunately, not had a professional scope of practice until recently when the American Society of Exercise Physiologists (ASEP) was founded. Recognizing the need for a clear professional identity, ASEP founders begin work to specifically define this, including the development of a scope of practice. It was crucial that this happen in that the professional opportunities for exercise physiologists in allied health care were slowly being encroached upon by other professions as they expanded their respective scopes of practice. Unfortunately, this continues today.

What is at hand now is to achieve official recognition for the exercise physiologists scope of practice among the other allied health care professions (e.g., physical therapists, nurses, registered dieticians). Accreditation of exercise physiology academic programs, title protection, and licensure for exercise physiologists are specific objectives that will help achieve this goal. These efforts will take time and will need to take place state by state.

The scope of practice for exercise physiologists can be viewed at www.asep.org/standards/ . Please note that I did not refer specifically to clinical exercise physiologists because, from the ASEP perspective of professionals, there are only exercise physiologists. Granted, there will be degrees of professional qualifications, experience, and possibly specializations, but we are all part of the same profession and should be recognized by the same title.

April 8 & 9, 2005 ASEP 7th Annual Meeting and Conference
Hilton Minneapolis /St. Paul Airport
(100 % of last years attendees stated they would recommend the ASEP conference to a colleague.) CLICK HERE for a Microsoft Word schedule of events (also PDF)!

And keep in mind: For more information on professional scope of practice, professional standards and code of ethics for exercise physiologists, accreditation of academic programs, board certification examination, and other important tasks already completed by ASEP in establishing a profession, visit: www.asep.org