After taking the Orthopedic Certified Specialist Exam last year I noticed a few things. One, there are very few high-quality practice questions available; even the most popular resource has a few glaring errors. Two, the practice resources available are inconsistent in terms of their relevance to the actual OCS exam and how information is tested. Three, the resources are written by clinicians like me! I decided that there was nothing stopping me from creating a practice test to help future clinicians preparing for this exam. Therefore, my primary purpose in creating OCS Success was to provide a resource that addresses a wide range of high-yield topics, as well as some obscure subject matter that may pop up on the exam. I also aim to provide detailed explanations and references to help direct follow-up studying as many of the other resources were a little sparse in this area. Many of the questions on the OCS Success practice exam are case-based to efficiently test on a larger amount of material. However, some of the scenarios offer very little information and challenge clinical judgment, which is sure to be a theme on the OCS exam. Questions are offered in groups with answers to follow each group, so that you don't have to flip back and forth constantly if you aren't ready for 161 consecutive questions! The book also includes a list of study tips and resources that I found most helpful during my preparation. Good luck to anyone taking this beast of an exam and I hope that OCS Success is a helpful tool! 

Insurance companies, government agencies, and corporate leaders all preach about prevention, quality care, and patient-first practices.  However, they do not provide the framework to support any of these values. They do not listen to healthcare professionals, those on the front lines, regarding what will be most beneficial for our patients and the most efficient use of resources. Instead, we are inundated by a constant barrage of paperwork, policies, and procedures that keep us from caring for patients in the most optimal way.  This is a disservice to patients and healthcare providers, because you better believe that the vast majority of physical therapists (I cannot speak to other healthcare professions) went into this field eager to help people and make a difference.  Instead, the unrealistic and irrelevant burden of red tape is contributing to poor outcomes, clinician burnout, financial strain, and lower quality of care.  
 
I don’t have a quick fix for the system, but I do know that the values need to match the machinery of our healthcare system. I know that we need to offer an environment that promotes patient-first practice, preventative medicine, wellness-based services, and more discretionary use of invasive procedures.  We need to streamline our healthcare system from the bottom up, starting with medical education. We need to eliminate the middle-men on the clinical and corporate levels in order to decrease the absurd amount of money wasted on administrative costs instead of actual healthcare services. We also need to utilize our resources more efficiently instead of wasting money and time with imaging, testing, and surgeries that are often unnecessary. Overall, there are just too many barriers preventing effective communication, too much legislation with ulterior motives, and too many hoops to jump thru for insurance.
 
Let’s focus in on some contextual examples relevant to physical therapy…
 
Documentation
 
I value documentation, but the documentation I do is not taken into consideration for the decisions that matter. Insurance companies never lay eyes on the qualitative, descriptive assessments and treatment plans based on direct interactions with patients for multiple hours per week. Instead they provide forms, forms filled with boxes requesting quantitative information that we consistently learn in school is the most inaccurate way to assess patient status and progress. Furthermore, they ask for it so frequently we do not actually expect to see change that is considered clinically important per the research. So, not only is this extra paperwork on top of the growing burden for daily visits, re-evaluations, and initial evaluations, but it is not constructive. Metrics that are not supported in the literature are being glanced over by paper pushers with no patient contact and used to determine how many visits these patients get, as well as what types of services are “necessary” during those visits.
 
Why not let the clinicians who are experts in optimizing the neuromusculoskeletal system for return to functional status make the call on what a patient needs? Do they not trust us? Believe me, we as clinicians do not want to keep even our favorite patients around longer than needed. We start planning for discharge on day one, because that is a success.  My job is bittersweet, because when I no longer get to work with an individual it means that they are better. It means that I did my job and they have returned to doing what they love. So we are not trying to make a buck by keeping a patient an extra month, trust me the reimbursement rates from insurance companies aren’t that lucrative anyway!
 
Let’s keep riding the paperwork train to the next stop…
 
Paperwork and red tape are akin to shackles on healthcare providers; they serve as a barrier to building rapport with patients, utilizing asterisk signs, and implementing best clinical practice during sessions when you are frantically typing on your computer. My time would be better spent performing literature reviews, applying evidence to patient cases, or completing continuing education rather than entering ambiguous metrics into my computer.  Physical therapy is an art, not a formula. Black and white diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes are the minority in our field. We learn in school that everything is gray, with the running joke that every answer to our questions started with, “it depends.” We learn the clinical prediction rules, the diagnostic clusters, the special tests and commit them to memory. Then we spend the later years in classroom and clinic realizing that they very rarely present this clearly. We learn how to interpret the gray and navigate the muddy waters while still applying best practice to encourage timely and effective outcomes.  We learn how to balance evidence and science with the reality that impairments do not happen in a vacuum but are rather shaped by our experiences, psychosocial factors, and cumulative insult to other tissues in the body. No herniated disc is the same, every case of patellofemoral pain is not created equally; there is no guarantee that someone will respond to the gold standard of care. We are taught NOT to be mindless robots that follow rules and clusters without original thought or critical thinking.  So, of course I cringe when I see forms that ask for metrics that are almost impossible to apply to some chronic cases. These forms distill intricate patient cases down to numbers in boxes, numbers that don’t matter.
 
Real patient example: 
I had a post-operative patient not cleared for any weight bearing activity after surgical fixation of femur fracture. After 6 weeks of therapy all mat-level strength, range of motion, and pain measures were “normal,” which I kindly indicated in their little boxes. But I explained very thoroughly in the tiny, tiny box designated for free response that he had made excellent progress within physician-directed precautions but could not walk, climb stairs, rise from a chair, or anything else a functional 27 year old should more than be able to do. He was cleared for progressive weight bearing within next week per physician, so I recommended continued physical therapy 2x/week for 1 month to progress weight bearing activity.”
Returned as follows,  “DENIED---discharge patient from physical therapy as further treatment is not deemed necessary due to objective measurements reported.”
 
Excuse me, WHAT?! NOT NECESSARY?  A 27 year old who cannot stand, walk, squat, climb stairs, etc. does not need more physical therapy once he is allowed to put weight on his newly repaired leg?!  It’s 8 pm later that week. My patient has missed a session and is unable to schedule more.  I’ve called the insurance company 2-3 times per day including on my own time from home. I finally get a call back at 7:30 one evening while I’m at the gym inquiring about the issue. After 15 minutes of discussion, they finally pull up the paperwork (because my verbal explanation as a doctor of physical therapy wasn’t enough) and find where I wrote my request for continued care. Her response, “Oh, I didn’t see that. We will clear him for 4 more visits.”  All she did was look at the boxes and see that his strength was 4+/5, which is arbitrary anyway, range of motion was “within normal limits” and he had minimal pain. She did not read what mattered. And even when she did a week later, she only approved 4 visits.  This was my first big experience as a new grad of the lunacy of our system.
 
Now, I realize there has to be some formula some objective way for insurance companies to determine how many visits to authorize, but let the clinicians have a real voice. Let the assessments we painstakingly write matter. They are the most important part of our documentation, but many clinicians I know boil it down to one sentence now “patient tolerated treatment without compliant, continue per plan of care.” They do this because they are fatigued and know it will not be considered. Now, I firmly believe in writing descriptive, informative assessments for my own reference and that of other clinicians who may work with my patients. But why not let that information paint the context of the objective measures we provide to insurance companies. Why not value the voice of the experts over numbers in a box. It’s like fitting a square peg in a round hole when they ask us to fill these forms out.  And even worse is that many (not all) MDs do not often read our notes either. We are kept on this leash that keeps getting longer but won’t be taken off, which puts us in no-man’s land. With MDs writing ambiguous scripts even for post-operative patients but then still requiring us to send in documentation that is not signed efficiently enough to prevent lapses in patient care. There is poor communication. We need to be respected as a doctoring profession and be able to speak freely with MDs without censoring our dialogue. I should be able to say “ I suspect cervical nerve impingement as primary driver of Pt X’s shoulder pain vs deltoid strain.  He has not responded to conservative care and may benefit from further imaging and/or cortisone injection to improve tolerance for PT.”  I should not fear upsetting MDs by simply suggesting a diagnosis or requesting imaging.  We spend the most time with patients and see their symptoms in the context of functional testing and active treatment.  
 
The consequence is that our healthcare system bleeds resources without results. We learn about interdisciplinary care, prevention, wellness, evidence-based practice, critical thinking, the value of the subjective interview and listening to patients.  But yet, we are not given the time to build rapport with patients , we are double and triple booked because reimbursement rates continue to go down. So, the visits patients are getting are not as impactful as they could be. Patients are not allotted wellness services and are often cut off before they are ready for discharge.   In a typical hour I  was juggling 2 and very occasionally 3 patients, filling out insurance forms, documenting on my computer, and cleaning equipment as I went. Functional MRI studies show we are inherently bad at multitasking, no matter how relatively “good” you may be at it.  So how can I be expected to think critically about manual interventions on a patient, apply test-retest criteria, and at the same time cue and progress corrective exercise for another other patient across the gym?  I did my best in a traditional clinical setting, and I think I did better than many based on patient feedback, but I could not provide gold standard best practice care to both patients during a given hour. It was safe, excellent, beneficial care; it was not negligent in any way. But I firmly believed I would be happier and could help patients get well faster if single booked.  Seeing one patient at a time should be the norm, not a luxury.  

SO, I LEFT.

After only 3 years I left my steady job so that I could put more energy into practicing how I WANTED and work FOR PATIENTS not insurance companies or corporate practices that have lost sight of what is most important.  I am truly passionate about what physical therapy can do in terms recovery, prevention, function, and overall wellness, and now I have the freedom to share that vision with others!
 
Working cash-based allows me to do the following:

• see patients 1:1 for a full hour, or more if needed. I no longer have to see 2-3 patients per hour just to make ends meet because of low reimbursement rates
  
• determine appropriate frequency and maintain continuity of care
  
• transition patients seamlessly to wellness services as appropriate
• apply evidence-based practice in terms of technique selection, exercise prescription, and dosing. My treatment plan is driven by what will be most beneficial to patient…period.
  
• critically think during session and utilize test-retest principles
  
• perform un-limited patient education to truly improve self-efficacy and empowerment for long-term success.
  
• take extra time with a patient if an hour is not enough
  
• spend energy reflecting and thinking on a case, and be available to answer questions in between visits.
  
• document exactly what I feel is relevant. I have the time to write quality assessments and enjoy documentation again because it is manageable.
  
• design high quality home exercise programs and make health behavior change a priority
  
• see a low enough total number of patients that I don’t get burnt out!

 
And I can tell you, it is working!
 

Let’s talk about core strength! Needless to say I am very passionate about this topic. Those who work with me will tell you I’m quite picky about proper instruction and programming when it comes to core stability. There are two reasons for this. One, it is the foundation for our movement patterns and is relevant to every individual under my care.  Two, while fact one has become rather accepted in the mainstream wellness world, core training is often miscued or inappropriately progressed under both fitness and rehabilitation umbrellas.  So climb on my soapbox with me and let’s talk about it!
 
When I say core, I am not talking about the aesthetic six-pack abs and obliques.  Those are wonderful, but they come with diet and exercise regimens that promote fat loss to expose the muscle definition we all have somewhere under there.  I am not saying these muscles can’t be developed and toned like any other muscle. I am also not denying their function in producing movement and power thru the torso.  All that being said, the core I am focused on is the layer of muscle below the washboard; the layer that provides functional STABILITY. And I can tell you from personal and clinical experience that having one does not correlate with having the other. I have worked with countless high-level athletes who are ripped up, but cannot stabilize worth a darn. I myself was humbled during my time recovering from spinal fractures as a level 9 gymnast. When they told me I needed to improve my core strength, I scoffed, ha! Then, not two minutes later I was dumbfounded when I couldn’t succeed at the world’s most simple exercise. From that day forward, I had a new respect for core training and have continued to incorporate these exercises into my workouts…maybe not daily like they suggested, but hey even physical therapists aren’t perfect!  
 
But before we can talk about proper core activation we need to elaborate on some foundational concepts…
 
We have movers and stabilizers when it comes to muscles in our body. The main role of the stabilizers is not to produce movement, but rather to protect our joints while movers produce gross motor patterns by pulling at origin and insertion to create changes in joint position. Again, the core muscles I’m talking about are stabilizers NOT movers. The rectus abdominis and obliques are the six-pack, the movers producing trunk flexion and  rotation, primarily.  The transverse abdominis (TrA) wraps around the torso deep to these muscles and serves as a functional corset to protect the spine and stabilize the lumbopelvic region, when activated properly.  The TrA is not alone in its task, but works with the diaphragm, pelvic floor, and multifidi. If any one of these components isn’t working in coordination with the others, then we get non-optimal stability; this can lead to pain, dysfunction, or decreased performance. 
 
Now, we can get down to the nitty gritty about core activation.  Videos can also be found in the instagram post @truenorthkp.
 
How NOT to use core properly:
 
1.anterior tilt creating tunnel under lower back from complete lack of stability
2.flat back, but stomach distended from being cued to “brace core” or "valsalva"
3. concavity in stomach due to rectus and oblique substitution from being told to suck stomach in
 
I can’t tell you how many times I see core mis-advertised, poorly cued, improperly advanced, and neglected even in the rehab world. I cringe seeing some of the social media posts related to this topic, especially from individuals with no real training. I was so fortunate to have some amazing clinical instruction during my rotations from a physical therapist specializing in women’s health AND orthopedics. Her insight into the intricacies of the deep core system has been invaluable during my early career and the key to success with several patients who didn’t reach their goals with previous therapists.
 
So what is the proper progression for evaluation and exercise prescription when it comes to core?  Below are the steps I follow.

1. Is diaphragmatic breathing pattern predominate, or are they using accessory  muscles instead?
2. Can they perform appropriate Kegel (yes, men and women)?
3. Can they isolate multifidi or can I feel palpable activation with the prone knee flexion test?  Multifidi is the most often neglected group in rehab programs as it is hard to cue.
4. Can they find neutral pelvis and isolate TrA without changing position of pelvis or causing visible concavity of upper abdomen? If not, then first step may be teaching them to turn everything OFF before learning how to turn muscles ON. You can’t use your deep core properly if your superficial abdominals are overactive. This is often the case athletes, especially gymnasts.
5. Can they hold TrA isometric for 10 seconds without holding their breath?
6. How far can they get in TrA core progression?

• TrA with low march
• TrA with march to 90 degrees
• TrA with alternating leg extension
• TrA reverse march unilateral
• TrA reverse march bilateral
• TrA leg extension from tabletop position, unilateral
• TrA leg extension from tabletop position, bilateral
• TrA with bilateral leg raise

Then, prescribe HEP appropriately based on deficits found in various core groups.
 
It may seem like a lot, but with practice and a trained eye you can streamline the process. That being said, there is not one formula for how to teach core activation; what works for one person may not resonate with another.  Sometimes tedious experimentation with cuing, positioning, biofeedback, etc. is required to have that lightbulb moment with a patient! Never rush the basics; a strong foundation is a must prior to progressing to more advanced exercises. Once you master the basics though, deep core activation will become second nature during daily activities and more advanced abdominal exercises.
 
Let's end by briefly touch on some common misconceptions about core

• Lifting with a belt will ruin my core activation and make me weak-->FALSE.
  • Even I wear a belt for heavier sets, because it gives support and provides a proprioceptive cue to remind my body to engage core.  That being said, wearing a belt is NOT a substitute for engaging your core actively.  Rather, it is a supplement. If you valsalva and bear down under your belt that is also counterproductive and can contribute to hernias, pelvic floor dysfunction and even prolapse, especially in women.
• Wearing high-waisted leggings all the time inhibits my core and makes it weak-->FALSE
  • I saw a post recently claiming high-waisted leggings are causing an epidemic of core weakness. Come on people! Same concept as lifting belts, but to a lesser degree
• Learning how to use my core will make me skinny instantly-->FALSE
  • This won’t make you skinny, but it can help control bloating ladies and maybe make you feel more confident without those tummy tucker tights! But I see way too many IG model videos claiming extreme before and after pictures just from activating core…incorrectly I may add.
• Learning to engage your core is easy-->FALSE
  • Appropriate core activation is often counterintuitive, but once your body memorizes the pattern it carries over into both daily and exercise activities. However, if we are in pain or injured sometimes our core turns “off” and we have to go back to the basics and remind our bodies that it’s helpful not harmful to engage these muscles.

 
Remember, be functional not trendy and have a solid source of information for any core training in your program!