In my first clinical experience, I utilized a number of techniques that I had learned just that semester in my therapeutic exercise course. In particular, I got to utilize PNF techniques for resistance exercises for two patients. For one patient, it was to experience the technique and to provide exercise because he had been fairly proficient in the D1 flexion and extension lower extremity pattern. for the second patient I utilized D1 and D2 flexion and extension patterns to provide exercise and work on control of the more proximal joints and muscles and to address some increased tone in the distal joints and muscles, it went well for the control and exercise aspect proximally, distally it was a little more challenging because I was specifically looking to get the patient to recognize that they needed to Pronate their foot which would have been useful for the weight acceptance portion in the stance phase, and though they had been able to understand that in an open chain scenario it did not perfectly translate to the functional aspect but it did happen. I felt that my education served me extremely well in this scenario because it pushed me to think about everything; from foot and ankle anatomy, to muscle actions, joint positions and how those positions are changing during gait, and what motions were impaired when seeing deficits and then finally to what PNF is and why it would be appropriate to use and what specifically I was doing it for. this example for me was the most empowering moment of my clinical experience and I think that relating what I was doing to my educational components helped me develop a principle to work with going forward.

The CTAPTA event, in general, was an interesting event to attend regarding two specific aspects. Firstly, it drove in just how relatively young the profession is and the challenges it faces as a result, and more specific to myself it provided a glimpse into the possibilities as a student of the profession. At the beginning of the day, the first speaker Bob Rowe made it abundantly clear that physical therapy is both misunderstood to insurance companies who pay for care and that physical therapists do not do enough for themselves documentation wise. These two problems in tandem with each other suggest that companies are reluctant to pay for services they do not understand as necessary and that therapists simply do not document necessity efficiently. This singular problem is interesting in 2017, to suggest to an average individual with no understanding of healthcare or insurance companies that their physical therapy is not covered under insurance because the documentation is not substantiated with data would be bewildering, especially if the therapy that person receiving is beneficial to them. This scenario does exist however, and given the stress that Rowe put on physical therapists to learn to document appropriately and continue their education requirements it does seem indicative that the professions youngness is the roots of the confusion, there isn’t enough data because the profession is relatively new (relative to physician work) and that there have been a multitude of physical therapists who have not adhered to certain standards regarding patient care and medical necessity. Not to say that physical therapists should accept all the fault in this problem relationship, insurance companies have their responsibilities as well, but it’s clear based on Rowe’s speech that there is a problem with how a therapist can conduct themselves in the profession and there can be a solution via personal responsibility. Secondarily the lectures were just a good way to be interested in material, the only problem I felt I had was not having enough basis in looking at the material as a therapist but I can only imagine that attending a class like Olympic weightlifting with an emphasis on rehabbing athletes would be exponentially more exciting with more context as a therapist.