A positive decision for patients Thursday was made in the South Carolina Supreme Court to allow physician practices to employ physical therapists, ending a longstanding disagreement regarding how the practice of physical therapy should be regulated in the state.
At stake in Joseph v. South Carolina Department of Labor, was whether physical therapists in South Carolina can provide treatment as direct employees of physicians to make that service more easily available for patients. The ruling: Physicians in South Carolina can now employ physical therapists in their practice.
“This patient-centered decision from the Court supports our contention that integrated physical therapy services can be in the best interest of patients when handled ethically and in compliance with existing self-referral restrictions,” the South Carolina Orthopaedic Association said in a statement.
What led to the overturn
The South Carolina Board of Physical Therapy has long sought to require physical therapists to provide their services directly to patients or through a practice group of physical therapists. However, other licensed health care professionals such as occupational therapists, speech pathologists and nurse practitioners may be employed by physicians in the state.
In 2006, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled in Sloan v. South Carolina Board of Physical Therapy that the state’s Physical Therapy Practice Act prohibited physical therapists from working in a physician’s office and providing physical therapy to the physician’s patients through what are referred to as “in-practice referrals.”
The decision caused many problems for patients, physicians and physical therapists, changing the way physical therapy was practiced in South Carolina and making it more difficult for patients to access physical therapy services. That decision was overruled Thursday, allowing physical therapists to work directly with physicians to provide their services to patients.
“In Sloan, this Court interpreted … the South Carolina Code as prohibiting a physical therapist from being employed by a physician when the physician refers patients to the physical therapist for services,” the Court said in the decision. “Contrary to that decision, we now find that the classification, which distinguishes physical therapists from other licensed health care professionals, has no rational relationship to the legislative purpose of the statute.”
The Litigation Center of the AMA and State Medical Societies and the South Carolina Medical Association jointly supported the plaintiffs, who were a physical therapist and two orthopedic surgeons. The now overruled Sloan decision had unnecessarily burdened patients’ access to health care services—an obstruction which the Litigation Center has worked hard to overcome.
