This post has been a long time coming. I totally agree with what Chad said in this article on the same subject. It is good to know how others prepared for and passed the NPTE…so here are my 2 bits:

I studied for 5 weeks, nearly every day. I used a hybrid system between the PTEXAM by Scorebuilders (Giles) and TherapyEd’s Review & Study Guide (O’Sullivan). I stared with O’Sullivan, digging deep into the Musculoskeletal and Neuromuscular sections. Also, like Chad, I had my anatomy atlas (Grants) opened next to the study guide. After those 2 chapters (which are extremely detailed) I switched tactics and used Scorebuilders for my academic review. I am glad I did this for a couple reasons. The layout of the book suited my eye better…I felt more comfortable and could study longer from it. Also, although pertinent, the information inside is not as detailed and has more charts/tables. I think they describe it nicely on the back cover of their book: ” We don’t try to teach you everything there is to know about physical therapy-only the information and strategies you will need to pass the exam.” I felt like TherapyEd was trying to re-teach me everything sometimes, and it got overwhelming. It became my secondary guide if I needed supplemental information.

After those first two chapters I took my first TherapyEd practice exam. This may have been a mistake as I was not prepared at all, but also it gave me a good baseline as to what I would need to focus on in the future. After that, I really took the rest of the practice exams whenever I felt like I had learned more in my weaker areas. No set schedule, but I alternated between Scorebuilders and TherapyEd. I also took the PEAT exams…a long time ago. Here are my practice exam scores:

PEAT 1- 141

PEAT 2- 132

TherapyEd A- 121

Scorebuilders 1- 144

TherapyEd B- 134

Scorebuilders 2- 161

TherapyEd C- 140

Scorebuilders 3- 158

As you can see, I performed better on the Scorebuilders tests. I don’t know that they are any easier, just different. I like how they mimic the PEAT in format with the blue screen, etc. I also found them easier to navigate, etc. I considered purchasing the Scorebuilders Online Advantage tests, but considering I took 8 practice tests I don’t think I really needed it.

I got to a point (after the 161) where all I wanted to do was take practice tests. I think they really helped me identify weaknesses, but they also helped me study. After every exam I went back through the questions with my book and re-examined all my responses, even the correct ones. Scorebuilders was great in that they gave a reason for EVERY response. Not a catch all “refer to information about such and such if you missed this question.”

Finally, I prayed. A lot during the whole process. I am a religious person and this helped me. It may not be something you do, but a little extra help couldn’t hurt, right?

Anyways, I passed the exam and am now waiting for a license. How will you know when you’re ready? I don’t know how to say, but I had a feeling deep down saying I was good to go. Have confidence, study hard, and you’ll do great!

I hope one day soon no one will need to know this mnemonic thanks to advances in medicine. If Coke Zero can taste identical to original Coca Cola, then why can’t we cure cancer??? I am looking at you clever TV commercial writers and yes you too scientists.

Its been a long day so excuse my ramblings. Here is the cancer CAUTION acronym/mnemonic.

C – Change in bowel or bladder habits
A – A sore that does not heal
U – Unusual bleeding or discharge
T – Thickening or lump in the breast or any part of the body
I – Indigestion or difficulty swallowing
O – Obvious change in a wart or mole
N – Nagging cough or hoarseness

A surgery is not always the best remedy in case of a knee ligament injury, reveals a novel study aimed at comparing the benefits of surgery and physical therapy in case of a knee injury.

An intense physical therapy proves as effective as a surgical operation for most of the people with a knee ligament breakage, which commonly affects athletes.

Trying rehabilitation can evade almost half of the operations done in order to repair a tear in the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), which lies beneath the kneecap and attaches the thigh bone to the shin bone.

Treatment of “an acute ACL injury should start with structured rehabilitation rather than early ACL reconstruction,” Richard Frobell of Lund University in Sweden, whose study appears in the New England Journal of Medicine, said.

Around 200,000 ACL reconstructions worth billions of dollars are performed every year in the United States.

121 people studied

121 people aged between 18 to 35 years were studied by the researchers. None of the participants had ever been professional athletes.

After a period of 2 years, participants in the surgery group performed no better than those who received only physical therapy. Thus, without any compromise in the end results, surgery was evaded in 61 percent patients of the study group.

The participants were randomly given either a surgical treatment or rehabilitation.

However, 23 out of the 59 participants in the rehabilitation group also ended up with a surgery by the end of the study period.

Surgery group no better

After a period of two years, participants in the surgery group performed no better than those who received only physical therapy. Thus, without any compromise in the end results, surgery was evaded in 61 percent patients of the study group.

“It confirms what we have always intuitively thought and known, and that is that not all patients need their ACLs reconstructed and that the decision to perform an ACL reconstruction really needs to be individually tailored,” Levy said in a statement.

However, doctors need to be cautious as longer-term evaluations have shown that delayed ACL reconstruction in some people poses a risk of damaging other parts of the knee, and it was really hard to predict which patients will need surgery

“There’s solid evidence that people who have ACL tears and do not have reconstruction, if they go on to have frequent giving-way or instability episodes, they are at an increased risk of doing damage,” Levy said.

source [themoneytimes]

Recovering stroke patients whose physical therapy regimen is built around Wii video games appear to improve better than patients treated with standard therapies, a new Canadian study reveals.

The finding suggests that the enormously popular virtual reality programs could move beyond fun and games into the serious business of physical rehabilitation.

“This is new technology that may potentially help patients with a stroke,” said study lead author Dr. Gustavo Saposnik, director of the Stroke Outcomes Research Unit at St. Michael’s Hospital at the University of Toronto, Canada. “We ran a pilot study to see whether this is doable, safe, and more effective than routine therapy,” he said. “And we found it was.”

The findings are scheduled for presentation Thursday at the international conference of the American Stroke Association in San Antonio, Texas.

The Wii gaming system — produced by Nintendo, which did not fund the study — allows players to physically interact in real-time with images displayed on TV screens through the use of wireless motion-detection remote controls.

To gauge the promise of a Wii-based rehabilitation program, Saposnik and his colleagues focused on 20 stroke survivors, average age 61, all of whom were recovering from mild to moderate ischemic (caused by vessel blockage) or hemorrhagic (bleeding) strokes.

The stroke survivors were randomly divided into two groups: one group assigned to standard recreational therapy for impaired arms, involving the playing of card games or the block-stacking game Jenga, and a second group assigned to Wii-based therapy, either playing virtual tennis or cooking virtually (through “Wii tennis” or “Wii Cooking Mama”).

The Wii-based therapy involved movements that mimic the arm strokes required in a tennis match or those needed for cutting potatoes, peeling onions, slicing meat and shredding cheese.

Both the recreational and Wii-based therapies were administered in eight 60-minute sessions spread over two weeks. Both regimens were launched within two months following stroke occurrence, and both were described by the researchers as “intensive.”

After two weeks, the Wii group showed greater improvements than the recreational group in the patients’ affected arms, as measured in terms of the speed and grip strength necessary for normal motor function. No evidence of safety risk was found among the Wii group.

“Basically, we found that Wii therapy produced a 30 percent better improvement than recreational therapy in the time it took for the Wii patients to execute a task, and in how well they were able to execute a task,” said Saposnik.

Saposnik said that if the apparent benefits of Wii therapy hold up to further scrutiny, the high-tech physical therapy approach could help address two paramount challenges patients face when embarking on a recovery program: time and access.

“Rehabilitation is time-consuming, which can translate into poor compliance,” he noted. “And it’s not always available to all patients, based on cost and insurance constraints. But the high-intensity, repetitive nature of Wii therapy seems to offer quick benefits, and it’s widely available. So this could prove to be very helpful.”

“However, this is just an initial step towards expanding our understanding of the potential benefit this kind of innovative, interactive approach in neuro-rehabilitation might have following a stroke,” Saposnik cautioned.

“A larger study should be completed before making recommendations,” he said. “And that is already under way.”

Dr. William Meehan, director of the Sports Concussion Clinic at Children’s Hospital Boston, said Saposnik’s early observation makes “a lot of sense.”

“In general terms, the use of computer programs with some sort of motor movement component has certainly already been shown to be of benefit in terms of helping patients regain balance control when dealing with a sports-related concussion,” he said. “So I think this whole rehabilitation approach has great promise.”

“And it is much more convenient than normal therapy, in that patients could perhaps do this kind of thing at home,” Meehan added. “But, I would say it will probably end up best being used to augment standard therapies, because you do always want an actual therapist to monitor patient progress.”

SOURCES: Gustavo Saposnik, M.D., M.Sc., director, Stroke Outcomes Research Unit, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael’s Hospital of the University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; William Meehan, M.D., director, Sports Concussion Clinic, Division of Sports Medicine, Children’s Hospital Boston; American Stroke Association Conference, San Antonio, Texas, February 23-25, 2010
HealthDay

Copyright (c) 2010 HealthDay. All rights reserved.