Date of Award

Fall 12-1-2002

Document Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)

Department

Athletic Training

First Advisor

Catherine L. Stemmans

Second Advisor

Jody Brucker

Third Advisor

Christopher Ingersoll

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to identify the frequency and nature of perceived restrictions by certified athletic trainers (ATCs) and to determine the frequency of perceived restrictions for each practice setting within states that have legislation. This was a qualitative-descriptive study performed with a web-based survey. 10,000 ATCs receiving electronic mail from the National Athletic Trainers' Association (NATA) were invited to participate in this study. 1158 subjects participated in the study, and 724 subjects (295 female and 429 male; age=33.2 ± 8.3yrs) remained after exclusions. A webbased survey was created to evaluate perceived restrictions. Inorder to establish face validity 20 ATCs in the remote area were completed the survey and reported any difficulties. To verify correct interpretation of the questions each remote ATC met with the primary investigator. To ensure content validity, selected items were referenced to the NAT A Educational Competencies, NATA Board of Certification Role Delineation Study, and Standards of Practice. An electronic invitation was then sent to the subjects. The NATA Membership Department served as a clearinghouse. The survey was housed on an institution server and made available for 3 weeks. Data were electronically converted to an excel spreadsheet so means and percentages could be calculated. Restrictions are perceived by ATCs at a rate of 5% or 61% concerning skills clearly defined or not within an ATCs scope of practice, respectively. The highest restrictions are perceived to occur because of reasons involving state law, supervisor/institution rules, lack of tools and education, or reimbursement. The reason and rate of restriction seem to IV be different among ATCs working in the clinics, clinic/high school outreaches, high schools, and college/universities. Supervisor/institution rules and state law are the two reasons for practice restriction repeatedly perceived at a high rate in all practice settings. However, some reasons for restriction are more applicable in individual practice settings. Lack of tools is a frequently indicated reason for restriction in the high school setting, and lack of reimbursement is indicated more frequently in the clinic and clinic/high school outreach settings. However, in all practice settings the most frequently chosen reasons for restriction were choices that could be confirmed or denied by viewing authoritative documents. The perception of restricted practice may inhibit ATCs from practicing within their full scope of practice, decreasing the benefit the public receives when treated by an ATC.

Download

Share

COinS