Editor
Bill Pruitt, RRT
Mobile, AL
(251) 434-3405

House of Delegates Officers:
Debbie Fox, MBA, RRT / Speaker
Wichita, KS
(316) 962-2992

Frank Salvatore, Jr., BS, RRT, FAARC
Speaker-elect
Danbury, CT
(203) 797-7984

Camden McLaughlin, RRT / Secretary
Blacksburg, VA
(540) 230-7023

Joe Horn, BS, RRT / Treasurer
Arlington, TX
(817) 461-6543

Denise Johnson, BS, RRT / Past Speaker
Minneapolis, MN
(612) 273-5569

EDITOR'S REMARKS

Bill Pruitt, RRT
Publications Committee Chair

This issue of the Record is packed with information and news items. I’ll be brief in these remarks to give you time to look at this rather lengthy Record. As you read this you will see that AARC President, Toni Rodriguez, has provided an in-depth article on the thorny issues of polysomnography, licensure, and our profession. Of particular notice are the 2 documents included in her writing - the Guidance Document for Reviewing Polysomnography Legislation and the Guidance Document on Scope of Practice. Take a look at these and pass them on to your state societies.           

Next, HOD Speaker, Debbie Fox, gives us a quick look at the activities of the KSRC that are having an impact in her state and also provides a look forward to the Reno meeting in July.

Denise Johnson, Past Speaker, has a follow-up on the paramedic ventilator training/curriculum discussion that started in Phoenix. We will probably look closely at this in Reno so you may need to do a little digging to be prepared – see her article on this topic.

Frank Salvatore, Speaker – elect, has a financial/budget issue we need to study and he’s looking at the fun and function of the House….see his list of questions and prepare your answers.

Camden McLaughlin, House Secretary, has a touching article on his first-hand experiences in Blacksburg, VA and the recent tragic events there.

Treasurer, Joe Horn, has a short letter for us regarding his work.

There is an issue on the House procedures from Dan Maddalino, Delegate – Florida.

Emily L. Zyla, President, Michigan Society, finishes the Record with a very interesting project that has been started in her state ….this is something that may stir a movement!

[Top]

BOARD OF DIRECTORS ISSUES POSITION ON POLYSOMNOGRAPHY LEGISLATION

AARC President Toni Rodriguez, EdD, RRT

As members of the AARC’s leadership structure, you have been briefed and made aware of the concerns we have with state legislative efforts exempting or licensing individuals providing polysomnography services. We are seeing these efforts gain momentum, providing protection to sleep workers and marginalizing the licensed respiratory therapist. The focus of the legislative efforts now appears to be on gaining licensure for those engaged in polysomnography services.

As you are all aware, polysomnography services significantly overlap with the respiratory therapy scope of practice. However, the same kind of mandatory formal education and competency testing required of respiratory therapists is not required for those engaged in sleep services.

Today we find that many of you in the state respiratory therapy societies either are being presented with polysomnography licensure legislation or you are being asked to negotiate on the legislation that barters away part of what we do as respiratory therapists.

In 2003 the AARC Board of Directors adopted a Guidance Document on Scope of Practice, addressing the provision of respiratory therapy services by non-respiratory therapists, http://www.aarc.org/resources/guidance_document/ but we have found more is needed.

The Litmus Test (included in the Guidance Document for Reviewing Polysomnography Legislation) was developed and unanimously passed by the AARC Board of Directors. The Litmus Test provides five elements that must be included in any polysomnography licensure bill to garner the AARC support of the legislation. Let us be clear that the AARC is not opposed to the licensure of individuals who provide sleep services. However, the legislation must include provisions that protect the patient and assure and maintain the integrity of the respiratory therapy profession.

Please read these two documents below: 1.) the Guidance Document for Reviewing Polysomnography Legislation and, 2.) the Guidance Document on Scope of Practice

1. Guidance Document for Reviewing Polysomnography Legislation - 2007

The American Association for Respiratory Care Board of Directors has unanimously adopted the following guidance document on state legislative initiatives to license or regulate individuals providing polysomnography services.

            a. Optimum Legislative Structure
It is the position of the AARC Board of Directors that the optimum structure for regulating the discipline of polysomnography is the following:

Under the Respiratory Care Practice Act credentialed polysomnographic technologists (RPSGTs) will be granted a limited license to provide respiratory-related services consistent with the AARC's Guidance Document on Scope of Practice (found at the end of this article).

            Reasoning:  All respiratory therapists must be graduates of accredited educational programs and must have earned a professional credential by passing a valid and reliable competency examination. The Board of Registered Polysomnography Technologists (BRPT) administers a valid and reliable examination. Therefore individuals who have obtained the RPSGT credential may provide those respiratory therapy services, and only those respiratory services, that are contained within the BRPT examination matrix.

            b. Current Legislative Direction
The AARC’s support of a legislative revision of Respiratory Care Practice Acts that will provide a limited license for credentialed polysomnographers is the preferred way to address this scope of practice issue. This is not, however, the direction that the sleep community and its supporters are pursuing. Separate stand alone state licensure for polysomnographic personnel is the agenda.

This document provides clear guidance for reviewing and analyzing provisions related to polysomnography services in any state legislative proposals. The AARC will assist any state society in its efforts to assure that these conditions are met. If these conditions are not or cannot be included in the legislation, the AARC will actively oppose the measure.

            c. Litmus Test for Assessing Polysomnography Licensure Legislation
In order to assure safe and effective respiratory care will be provided to our patients, please make sure that the answer to each of the following questions is YES.

1.  Does the proposed legislation explicitly exempt the licensed respiratory therapist from obtaining further education or training in polysomnography?

2.  Does the proposed legislation explicitly exempt licensed respiratory therapists from additional examinations and professional credentials in polysomnography?

3.  Does the proposed legislation require physician delegation for the non-credentialed individuals?

4. Does the proposed legislation recognize other nationally accepted competency examinations and professional credentials in addition to the Registered Polysomnographic Technologist (RPSGT) credential?

5.  Does the proposed legislation limit, to a maximum of 36 months, the time an individual who does not have the RPSGT credential and who is working under physician delegation may practice and continue to provide sleep services?

            d. Rationale and Further Explanation

1. Does the proposed legislation explicitly exempt licensed respiratory therapists from obtaining further education or training in polysomnography services?
            Reasoning:  As it has been for decades, sleep testing and treatment continues to be part of the respiratory therapy scope of practice.

2. Does the proposed legislation explicitly exempt licensed respiratory therapists from additional examinations and professional credentials in polysomnography?
            Reasoning:  Licensed respiratory therapists must meet the education and testing requirements set forth by the state as respiratory care practitioners and are therefore practicing under the scope of practice that includes sleep testing and treatment.

3. Does the proposed legislation include a clear and specific provision that requires the non credentialed individuals such as polysomnography technicians and trainees, who have not earned the RPSGT or other nationally recognized credential, to work under the explicit delegation of a licensed physician (as defined under the state’s Medical Practice Act)?
            Reasoning:  Physician delegation means that individuals who provide health care services and who are not licensed or competency tested, provide these services “off the physicians’” license. This is how, respiratory therapists, prior to licensure could provide an array of health care services to patients. This is how respiratory therapists in Alaska and Hawaii, states that do not license respiratory therapists, do so today. Because non licensed, non competency tested individuals are delegated responsibility by the physician under the physician’s license, it is incumbent upon the physician to assure and assume responsibility for the quality and safety of services performed by these individuals. 

4.  Does the proposed legislation contain a provision to authorize the licensure board to accept other nationally recognized competency examinations and professional credentials in addition to the RPSGT?
            Reasoning:  It is standard language in health licensure laws to provide the             licensure regulatory boards or committees the flexibility of assessing the merits of other accrediting, examination or educational entities as the profession evolves and these new legitimate entities emerge and are established. This avoids the situation where one entity has a monopoly on the education or testing of the profession or occupation.

5. Does the proposed legislation limit, to a maximum of 36 months, the time an individual who does not have the RPSGT credential and who is working under physician delegation may practice and continue to provide sleep services?
            Reasoning:  It is not in the interests of patient safety and quality of care to permit,             in perpetuity, an individual who has not documented competency via a valid             examination to continue to provide that polysomnography portion of the respiratory care scope of practice. A time frame for the documentation of             competency and obtaining the RPSGT credential must be mandated by law.

            e. Conclusion:

In order for the AARC to stand in support of polysomnography licensure legislation, all of the conditions above must be met. By meeting these conditions, all providers of polysomnography testing and treatment services will be either a credentialed or licensed practitioner themselves or will be employed by the licensed physician and working off that physician’s license through delegation. In this case, the physician will be responsible for the safety and quality of care delivered by the non-licensed personnel.

Furthermore, this approach is non-exclusionary, as it provides a mechanism to assure safety and accountability, without restricting sleep or polysomnography services to the licensed respiratory therapist.

2. Guidance Document on Scope of Practice
The American Association for Respiratory Care (AARC) is aware that a credentialing examination is required by law in the vast majority of states in order to provide respiratory services described in their respective respiratory care practice acts.
The American Association for Respiratory Care (AARC) has received several inquiries regarding its opinion of competency documentation for persons who possess credentials other than Certified Respiratory Therapists (CRT) and Registered Respiratory Therapists (RRT) for the purpose of permitting these individuals to provide part of the scope of practice for respiratory therapists as described in respiratory care practice acts throughout the United States.
AARC believes that to ensure safe and effective care for all consumers requiring respiratory therapy, documentation of the provider’s competency to do so must possess the same rigor and validity as the examination processes that CRTs and RRTs must undergo in order to achieve their respective credentials.
The credentialing examinations for CRT and RRT are accredited by the National Organization for Competency Assurance’s (NOCA) accrediting arm, the National Commission for Certifying Agencies (NCCA). AARC recognizes that the credentialing examinations for Certified Pulmonary Function Technologist (CPFT), Registered Pulmonary Function Technologist (RPFT), and the Registered Polysomnographic Technologist (RPSGT) have also been accredited by the National Commission for Certifying Agencies (NCCA), assuring that these examinations are valid and reliable measures of competence within the limits of their respective examination matrices. AARC, therefore, supports recognition of individuals with the aforementioned credentials for the purposes of providing care which includes a subsection of the respiratory therapy scope of practice with the caveat that such provision be limited to the elements contained within each credentialing examination’s matrix respectively. (See below and refer to the link)

5/2003

CRT Examination Matrix http://www.aarc.org/resources/guidance_document/crt_content_outline.pdf

RRT Examination Matrix http://www.aarc.org/resources/guidance_document/rrt_content_outline.pdf

CPFT Examination Matrix http://www.aarc.org/resources/guidance_document/cpft_content_outline.pdf

RPFT Examination Matrix http://www.aarc.org/resources/guidance_document/rpft_content_outline.pdf

RPSGT Examination Matrix http://www.aarc.org/resources/guidance_document/brpt_content.pdf

[Top]

SPEAKER'S REPORT

Debbie Fox, MBA, RRT-NPS

One of my goals for this year was for each Delegation to coordinate two consumer related events in their state and report back to the House.  I wanted to share a couple of events that have been sponsored by my state affiliate.  In February, the Kansas Society held our annual Legislative Day at the State Capitol in Topeka.  This is the thirteenth year in a row the KRCS has sponsored an educational display complete with pig lungs, ventilators and pulmonary function screening.  The KRCS has two goals for this activity.  The first is to visit our Legislators and talk to them about Respiratory Therapy and to support any legislation concerning respiratory health. Although we didn’t have any pressing legislative issues during this session, we still want to maintain our presence and to make those important contacts with our state legislators.  The second goal is to educate the many visitors to the Statehouse and to perform lung function screenings.  Our visitors included students from elementary to college-age, retirees and other tour groups.  Approximately 25 KRCS members and students participated in Legislative Day.

Other consumer related events that our chapters have been involved in include the ALA Asthma Walk and the Cystic Fibrosis Great Strides Walk. I’m sure many of your societies have participated in similar events and I encourage you to share those activities with your fellow Delegates.  Sharing what has worked well for your affiliate will help and encourage others who are planning similar events.

Can you believe it’s only a few short weeks before we will all be gathering in Reno?  I thought I would update you on some of the HOD activities.  As you know in March the House completed our e-vote approval of the first reading of the amendments to the AARC Bylaws.  The vote on the second reading will take place during our summer HOD meeting.

The House Officers also attended the AARC Board Meeting in Dallas in March.  This provided us an excellent opportunity us to become familiar with the issues and priorities of the Board.  We appreciated the chance to interface with President Rodriguez and Board members and to participate in the meeting. We have continued our monthly conference calls in our effort to maintain open communication between the House and the Board. 

Preparations are currently underway for our Summer HOD meeting.  The House Officers and I have been putting together what we hope will be a useful and productive meeting.   I am planning to set aside some time for the Affiliate Best Practices Committee’s presentations.  Speaker-Elect Frank Salvatore and I want to involve all the Delegates in a healthy discussion regarding what you hope to gain from your experience in the House.  What do you find gives you the most value at the meetings and how can we make them even more meaningful?  Frank has some additional information in his report.

Past Speaker Denise Johnson has been busy working with the Ad Hoc Committee that was formed to follow-up on the Board’s request for more information about Resolution 22-06-02.  This resolution requested the AARC to develop a standardized curriculum for training paramedics in the appropriate use of ventilators for patient transport outside the hospital setting.  The Ad-Hoc Committee is co-chaired by Denise and Claude Dockter.  They will submit their report to the House and the Board at the Summer Meetings in Reno. 

Our Summer Meeting in Reno is shaping up to be two full and busy days.  Remember that in addition to the other business I discussed we will have Resolutions to consider, Committee Reports and House Officer nominations.  We are also expecting a rather large group of new Delegates this session.   I’m looking forward to seeing everyone.   Please feel free to contact me at any time if you have any questions or suggestions.

[Top]

PAST SPEAKER'S UPDATE

Denise Johnson, BS, RRT

Update on Ad Hoc Committee to address the Paramedic ventilator curriculum resolution

We will soon be gathering for our first House meeting of 2007.  I am really looking forward to seeing you all. I want to update you on the status of one of the resolutions we passed in Phoenix last summer. 

The resolution was as follows:

 #22-06-02:  “Resolved that the American Association for Respiratory Care develop in conjunction with the National Association of EMS Physicians (NAEMSP) a standardized curriculum for training paramedics in the safe and appropriate use of ventilators for transport of patients outside the hospital setting.” 

As you recall, it was approved and moved to the BOD for consideration. Claude reported back to us that the BOD referred it back to the House for additional impact information.  The BOD members wanted a better understanding of the status of current RT involvement in cross training for Paramedics using portable ventilators. 

Speaker Fox appointed an Ad Hoc Committee to facilitate this with Claude and myself as Co-chairs and we are in the process of working with our committee members to address the BOD’s desire for more information. 

Some of the questions that have been raised in limited discussions with BOD members including at the recent March BOD meeting in Dallas and also amongst House leadership are as follows:

1. Is this resolution addressing a national issues/trend?
2. If it is a national issue/trend what is the supporting evidence?
3. If a curriculum change is required, what should it include?
4. Is the NAEMSP the appropriate organization to be working with?
5. It appears the EMT has limited organizational structure to enforce how national curriculum is applied, is this resolution ahead of its time?

We have been reviewing the current national standard curriculum that is posted on the following website if you are interested in taking a look. http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/ems/EMT-P/disk_1%5B1%5D/Intro.pdf

Cheryl West has put together an overview of the curriculum in a condensed form.  Please let me know if you are interested in reviewing her document.

We are considering a survey to address some of questions listed above and we may decide to do the survey with you in person during the upcoming House meeting.  We are interested in your input.  Please feel free to contact Claude, myself or any of the committee members which currently include Keith Siegel, ME, Candy Schladenhauffen,  IN and Pat Pangburn, OR.   If you are interested in being a part of this committee, please let me know.

Safe travels and we will see you in Reno!

[Top]

SPEAKER-ELECT'S REPORT

Frank R. Salvatore, Jr., BS, RRT, FAARC

One of my duties during the past two years was to serve on the AARC Audit Sub-Committee.  It is a sub-committee of the Finance Committee.  Last year I served on the committee as the HOD - Treasurer.  This year, as the Speaker-elect, it is my responsibility to serve as the chair of the Audit Sub-Committee.  The charge is to monitor the financial affairs of the Association in cooperation with external independent auditors.  In March, the committee reviewed and spoke with the auditors from Salmon Beach & Associates regarding their audit of the AARC.  Each year they review the finances and provide a review of the association’s practices.  In this review, they look at practices that might need attention. Their feedback gives the association a reflection on AARC’s effectiveness as a business.

Last year information was reported regarding practices related to Sarbanes-Oxley Act. I took the time to discuss this in my June 2006 AARC Record Article.  This year, their recommendations have brought to light many opportunities for improvement and excellence. The auditor noted a possible conflict of interest in having the HOD approve the AARC budget.  This concern has been voiced on several occasions in their reports. Delegates are voting members of their state society; this means that a possible conflict of interest may occur between their fiduciary responsibility in their state society versus their fiduciary responsibility in the AARC. This issue has been forwarded to the AARC Board of Directors meeting in July for discussion only. Recall that any change in this practice requires a change in the by-laws. Therefore, any change related to this is not going to happen overnight nor without the input of the House of Delegates.

Having presented the above information, it brings me to the purpose of my article.  We, as members of the HOD, have the opportunity to be proactive and analyze what we do. 

• What part of the HOD experience means the most to you? 
• What part of the HOD experience makes the most difference to our members and ultimately our profession?  (I do not pretend to have the answers, but I will be working with you over the next year to try to answer those questions.)
• I have asked Speaker Fox for some time this July to hold focus groups to try to put together a plan to improve the HOD experience.  Look for more information to come.

[Top]

SECRETARY'S REPORT

Camden McLaughlin, RRT

Blacksburg, that morning was calm and quiet; a little windy with slight snowfall- typical early spring in the town.  I took an early run, did some cycling and then had the opportunity to work in my home office to play that proverbial game of “catch-up”.  Later, I received a mid-morning text message from my daughter indicating that there had been an early shooting in one of the dorms on the Virginia Tech campus.

Unusual, to say the least, but the end of the semester was approaching and suicides are more likely during these times.  Turning the TV to the local station, I spent what was the next several hours being enveloped in the horror of a completely senseless tragedy that took the lives of thirty-two students and professors.   

This was not an event that took place in another town or community and it’s not an event that occurred on a college campus somewhere far away.  This event took place in my town and on the university campus of my alma mater.

The world arrived in Blacksburg!  The Katies and the Matts, the Nancy Graces and the Geraldos, the Larry Kings and even news stations from across the ocean.  They were all here to share with the world the horrific tragedy that had fallen upon Virginia Tech and Blacksburg.

Blacksburg, Virginia, is hidden in the Blue Ridge Mountains and entwined with Virginia Tech in such a way in that it’s hard to know where the university ends and the town begins.  People walk and ride the biking trails to school and to work.  Quiet and peaceful, Virginia Tech is known for its schools of business and engineering.  Also known nationally for the football program, Tech has had the pleasure of basking in the glory and the unfortunate job of dealing with some less than positive incidents related to the sports team; but to be handed the title of worst shooting tragedy on a school campus is more than one could have ever imagined.  At the convocation held the following day, so crowded that the overflow was sent to the football stadium, our sense of unity first emerged, showing the true nature of our university and town communities.  The first echo of hope began- “We are Virginia Tech, We Will Prevail”. And then, just a few at first, with more joining in with each repetition, the crowed began to chant “Let’s Go Hokies...Let’s Go Hokies!”

Sometimes in life, stuff just happens and it can either make or break us.  The people in our community and our university chose to make the best of our situation.  Our sense of unity becomes stronger with each passing day.  We were not going to be angry, we were not going to be prejudiced; we prayed for everyone, even the family of the young man who created this heartbreak. We were going to honor those kids and the professors as well as their families, remembering, “We are Virginia Tech, We Will Prevail”.

Everyday life deals hardships to each and every one of us; unfortunately no one is immune to or can escape the challenges that life issues out.  It comes down to how you play the cards that you are dealt.  The reaction to the simple, every-day challenges to those life changing events is what defines who we are and how we will continue to live our lives.  Remember, “We are Virginia Tech, We Will Prevail”.

Back in 1997, I was this little state society president and made the decision to sit in on a HOD meeting with the Virginia delegation. There they were, Ken Thigpen and Jerry Bridgers- and wow, could those boys ever deliver!  They were my inspiration then and even after ten years, I continue to be inspired by them as well as many others in The House. 

There’s certainly a reason you are here!  For those of you who have been here for a while or even re-cycled, you understand.  Find a youngster and make them welcome.  Begin a conversation; it might lead to a lifelong friendship.  If you are new (a.k.a.: a newbie) to our esteemed group - find that inspiration, share your talents, enjoy yourself, embrace your fellow delegates; these people will be your friends for life.  “Remember, friends are like the stars, you don’t see them all of the time, but they are always there.”

Please know how much I appreciate the honor and privilege of serving as your secretary of our House of Delegates.  I am excited about the opportunity of working with you and my fellow House Officers.  After attending my first AARC BOD meeting in March I am truly convinced that the leadership of Toni and this BOD, with the support of the executive office, has the very best interest of the AARC and our profession at heart and soul.

I am always within reach.  If I can ever assist in any way please let me know, avthoke@comcast.net or 540-230-7023.

[Top]

TREASURER'S REPORT

Joe Horn, BS, RRT

Serving the AARC as the House of Delegates Treasurer has been such an honor thus far. One of my responsibilities includes serving on the AARC Audit Sub-Committee. In March, the committee worked with the auditors of Salmon & Beach as they performed the audit. We reviewed the financial structure of the organization and found it to be in good financial standing. This process was a very interesting one which I found to be thorough and very professionally done.

I am currently working on a cost impact regarding resolutions for our July meeting. I have found the staff at the AARC to be quite helpful in this task. I have depended on them quite a bit and I appreciate all of their help.

[Top]

PREMATURE PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE

Dan Maddalino, Delegate - Florida

As members of the House of Delegates we follow many principles of order and conduct. These principles are mixed with a comfortable amount of tradition and custom. When we gather twice each year we usually adopt the form of parliamentary procedure commonly referred to as Robert’s Rules of Order. By doing so, we exhibit a tendency for a democratic model of fairness and equality to address our function and the business at hand. While Robert’s Rules of Order was organized to be the pinnacle of fairness and order, there are opportunities to intimidate newer members of our body by using certain rules to limit the rights of House members.

One method of stifling member participation is to prematurely apply certain processes which are not debatable, to undermine the democratic model. These processes may even be applied to manipulate the outcome of issues that have come before the House. The true effect is the loss of House member rights, involvement, and respect for the overall process. At issue is the premature application of “Calling the previous question” or more commonly “Call the question” during discussion or debate on an issue before the House. By Robert’s Rules once a member “calls” for the previous question all discussion or debate must halt. Regardless of how many delegations are listed to address the topic at hand, discussion must be stopped by the Speaker of the House. True, although two-thirds of the delegations must then side with ending discussion by this manner, rarely is a true tally taken. But that is not the point here. During the past two House meetings (most notably the July ’06 meeting) the application of calling the question occurred despite the fact that several Delegations listed by the Secretary had yet to be heard. This frustrated members who felt not all sides of the issue at hand had been addressed

The point of calling the previous question is to move the Speaker to call for a vote after it is apparent all interested parties have had their opportunity to speak or when discussion has become redundant. There have been times when it appeared that the discussion was stopped so as to avoid hearing opposing views – which is an undemocratic approach to debate. Even more disturbing, calling the question has been increasingly applied to rush the meeting along and achieve an early adjournment. Have the issues before the House become so trivial that it is more important to leave prior to the appointed time of adjournment than to fairly hear from all delegates wishing to address the issues? Even if the required two-thirds side with shutting off debate does that make it right? Does that make it fair?

[Top]

RESPIRATORY THERAPY RECOGNITION

Emily L. Zyla, BS, RRT – President, Michigan Society

As the Respiratory Education Coordinator for a large community based hospital system, we are always struggling for different ways to recognize the outstanding work of respiratory therapists. We hear complaints often on how respiratory is viewed as a second-class citizen compared to nursing. I’m sure this is not a new story for many of you.

As president of Michigan Society for Respiratory Care, I also get comments regarding the lack of recognition respiratory therapists and the profession receives. It is always an interesting dilemma on how to solve this ever-present issue of therapist/professional recognition.

Early in my presidency, I was contacted by two women with a different problem. They had formed a non-profit foundation and one of their missions is to provide recognition for outstanding respiratory therapists in the community. They WANTED to recognize therapists and were having issues with communicating this to the customers they wanted to recognize …..namely US. What a perfect partnership for the MSRC!

Their foundation is named The FACES Foundation (Family and Caregiver Education and Support) and it was formed in memory of the founder’s husband (first name Phil) who was diagnosed with non-specific interstitial pneumonitis. Sharman Lamka and her friend Jolayne Thompson started this foundation and established the award PHIL (Pulmonary Health and Illness of the Lung) based on the same premise as the Daisy award recognizing nurses. (I had never heard of the Daisy award but a Google search gave me more information than I needed.) They have 3 goals for the foundation, #1 have a hospital based program recognizing outstanding respiratory therapists, #2 provide caregiver education to help improve the quality of patient care and #3 to provide speaker sponsorships educating professionals, patients and families regarding issues relevant to lung disease.

This work was just started in the last year and the first ever PHIL award was presented recently at St. Joseph’s Hospital in Ann Arbor, Michigan to one of the respiratory therapists who was a primary care giver for Phil prior to his death. Sharman presented the award herself in a ceremony at the hospital.

At my hospital we are working to tie the PHIL award in with the other annual awards for excellence so there will be several nursing, physicians and a respiratory therapist awards presented on the same night at the same ceremony. Talk about raising the bar for recognition of respiratory therapists!  

The MSRC Awards and Scholarship Chairperson is also working with the Faces Foundation to have the MSRC recognize the PHIL award winners in Michigan on an annual basis.

The Daisy award for nursing is presented at hundreds of hospitals across the country and the FACES foundation has a goal of establishing the PHIL award throughout the nation. If you wish more information on this project please go to the foundation’s web site: www.thefacesfoundation.org or go to a link for this project on the Michigan Society website: www.michiganrc.org . We plan for the Michigan Delegates, Anne Hamilton and Gary Jeromin, to bring pamphlets to the summer HOD meeting. If you would like further information, please feel free to contact me as well, at emily.zyla@spectrum-health.org, or (616) 391-8725.

[Top]

Membership Figures

(as of 6/14/07)

[Top]

For Your Information

The Calendar of Events can be found in both the Delegate Handbook and the Chartered Affiliate Handbook, located at: http://www.aarc.org/aarc_hod/

[Top]