Cargando…

Autonomy-hindering scope for physiotherapy practice in African countries: Results of creatures and antinomies of regulatory laws

BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals in different countries are governed by laws and statutes for their scopes of practice to ensure that services are rendered by suitably licenced and qualified professionals in order to protect the public. A few of these laws are found to paradoxically hinder the a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Useh, Ushotanefe
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AOSIS 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8008050/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33824921
http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajp.v77i1.1518
_version_ 1783672619080351744
author Useh, Ushotanefe
author_facet Useh, Ushotanefe
author_sort Useh, Ushotanefe
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals in different countries are governed by laws and statutes for their scopes of practice to ensure that services are rendered by suitably licenced and qualified professionals in order to protect the public. A few of these laws are found to paradoxically hinder the autonomy of physiotherapy. OBJECTIVE: My article documents the autonomy-hindering scope for physiotherapy practice in selected African countries. METHOD: The methodologies used in my article were both a review and comparative approach for the interpretation of statutes. RESULTS: Three African countries presented a clear legal definition of physiotherapy in their regulatory frameworks and regulated other rehabilitation professions as well. In my article, these regulations are referred to as ‘combo regulations’. The rationale for ‘combo regulations’ is not clear and found to hinder professional autonomy. Only one statute from Rwanda provided a scope for physiotherapy that was not autonomy-hindering. CONCLUSION: There is, therefore, a need for urgent review of most laws regulating physiotherapy in the selected African countries to assist with the duty of protecting the public. All autonomy-hindering scopes for physiotherapy practice in African countries should be repealed and amended accordingly. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: A clear scope shall assist with protecting the public and clinical practice and clearly states ‘what physiotherapy is and what it is not’.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8008050
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher AOSIS
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80080502021-04-05 Autonomy-hindering scope for physiotherapy practice in African countries: Results of creatures and antinomies of regulatory laws Useh, Ushotanefe S Afr J Physiother Review Article BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals in different countries are governed by laws and statutes for their scopes of practice to ensure that services are rendered by suitably licenced and qualified professionals in order to protect the public. A few of these laws are found to paradoxically hinder the autonomy of physiotherapy. OBJECTIVE: My article documents the autonomy-hindering scope for physiotherapy practice in selected African countries. METHOD: The methodologies used in my article were both a review and comparative approach for the interpretation of statutes. RESULTS: Three African countries presented a clear legal definition of physiotherapy in their regulatory frameworks and regulated other rehabilitation professions as well. In my article, these regulations are referred to as ‘combo regulations’. The rationale for ‘combo regulations’ is not clear and found to hinder professional autonomy. Only one statute from Rwanda provided a scope for physiotherapy that was not autonomy-hindering. CONCLUSION: There is, therefore, a need for urgent review of most laws regulating physiotherapy in the selected African countries to assist with the duty of protecting the public. All autonomy-hindering scopes for physiotherapy practice in African countries should be repealed and amended accordingly. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: A clear scope shall assist with protecting the public and clinical practice and clearly states ‘what physiotherapy is and what it is not’. AOSIS 2021-02-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8008050/ /pubmed/33824921 http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajp.v77i1.1518 Text en © 2021. The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Licensee: AOSIS. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License.
spellingShingle Review Article
Useh, Ushotanefe
Autonomy-hindering scope for physiotherapy practice in African countries: Results of creatures and antinomies of regulatory laws
title Autonomy-hindering scope for physiotherapy practice in African countries: Results of creatures and antinomies of regulatory laws
title_full Autonomy-hindering scope for physiotherapy practice in African countries: Results of creatures and antinomies of regulatory laws
title_fullStr Autonomy-hindering scope for physiotherapy practice in African countries: Results of creatures and antinomies of regulatory laws
title_full_unstemmed Autonomy-hindering scope for physiotherapy practice in African countries: Results of creatures and antinomies of regulatory laws
title_short Autonomy-hindering scope for physiotherapy practice in African countries: Results of creatures and antinomies of regulatory laws
title_sort autonomy-hindering scope for physiotherapy practice in african countries: results of creatures and antinomies of regulatory laws
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8008050/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33824921
http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajp.v77i1.1518
work_keys_str_mv AT usehushotanefe autonomyhinderingscopeforphysiotherapypracticeinafricancountriesresultsofcreaturesandantinomiesofregulatorylaws