Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Everything that you are ever going to want to know about running shoes: Running Shoes Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Have you considered the Critical Thinking and Skeptical Boot Camp, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

Podiatrist vs FHP

Discussion in 'United Kingdom' started by nass2474, Jun 5, 2007.

  1. nass2474

    nass2474 Welcome New Poster


    Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
    I personally believe that there is no difference between a Podiatrist and a FHP because both practice Podiatry.
    We have so many Podiatry Diploma holding people in the field who are providing a good service to the public who have chose not to register with the HPC and are using the term FHP and these people studied more than what FHP colleges are offering at the moment.
    The profession Chiropody has been changing over the past few years and with any other profession new laws and regulations are introduced.
    Even in General Medicine itself a GP can refer a patient to a Surgeon but it doesnt mean that he doesnt know anything about 'Surgery'.
    FHPs work alongside Podiatrists for the benefit of the public's health.
     
  2. Admin2

    Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

  3. vontabago

    vontabago Member

    Having spent three years at unversity with most weekends and evenings studying, and you think a FHP course is the same. You do not have any idear of whats involved in the podiatry degree.

    Why dont you apply to become a podiatrist surgeon, I am sure they will take you with your FHP course. After all its the same qualification.
     
  4. cornmerchant

    cornmerchant Well-Known Member

    Hi Nass2474

    I am not sure here who you are trying to convince that there is no difference between a degree or diploma holding Pod and an FHP.
    Those ex HPC members may now be calling themselves FHPs and it must be a soul destroying decision to give up the right to use the title Podiatrist/chiropodist, however, I suspect that the numbers are not as large as you are implying and I suspect that most of them were grandparented onto the register and couldnt fulfil the criteria when it came to re-registration.

    Privately trained FHPs are not registered, do not undertake a training recognised by the HPC and they therefore do not have to meet strict standards which involve great expense.

    I think , by your logic, that I may become an Inca- after all, I do know a little bit about them!:)

    Cornmerchant
     
  5. davidh

    davidh Podiatry Arena Veteran

    Hi,

    This is a misconception. Degree-trained Pods (and those of us who were three-year trained and have bothered keeping up to date) have, in general, a greater knowledge of:
    Biomech.
    Anat and Phys.
    Medicine
    Pharmacology.


    We can also administer local anaesthetic and certain drugs/theraputic agents by injection, and can carry out nail and skin surgery.

    Ther are some three-year trained (possibly degree-trained too) Podiatrists who have chosen not to be HPC registered, thereby adopting the title of FHP by default.
    These practitioners cannot legally procure local anaesthetic. Neither can they administer it by injection, or perform skin or nail surgery.

    FHPs (Foot Health Practitioners) are certainly part of the foot health industry in the UK (no matter what some would like to believe). They perform some of the same tasks as Podiatrists, but they generally practice at a lower level.
     
  6. Peter

    Peter Well-Known Member

    Last time I looked, Practising Podiatry involved lower lumb musculoskeletal examination, neurovascular assessment, integument examination and diagnosis, trained in administration of regional anaesthesia, taught nail surgery techniques and work as part of a multidisciplinary team.
    Furthermore, Podiatrists are now prescribers, administrators of corticosteroid injections and other advanced techniques.

    Do you still believe that FHP practice=Podiatry practice?:pigs:
     
  7. Dido

    Dido Active Member

    Dear nass 2474,
    When I see posts like yours, I wonder if they are created to be controversial or whether this is your real opinion?
    If it is the latter I would be pleased if you would let us know where you have obtained the information that enables you to state as fact that many Podiatry Certificate holders are now practicising as FHPs?
    The certificate, as it was then, was in Chiropody not Podiatry. Podiatry had not been adopted for general use in this country at that time.
    It seems you are believing the fallacious statement promulgated bysome unregulated practitioners that they "can do anything a chiropodist can do"?
    You are entitled to hold any opinion you like but as other posters to this thread have said, you seem to be missing some facts somewhere.
    Dido
     
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2008
  8. Steve The Footman

    Steve The Footman Active Member

    The difficulty and standards to get into a degree course is very different compared to certificates and diplomas. While they may do similar types of treatment the quality of care should in general be better from a degree qualified podiatrist compared to a diploma holder. The degree qualified professional will have been required to learn much more than the diploma holder even if they both studied for the same duration. To pass their subjects should be much harder for the degree student as well. For the same reason you would expect an honours graduate or post graduate degree holder to be able to offer a better quality of care.

    This is certainly not always the case in reality. There are undoubtably some FHP who offer a better quality of care than some podiatrists. But it is true in a general sense and that is why they have different scope of practice, can use different terms in describing themselves and patients have different expectations for treatment.
     
  9. davidh

    davidh Podiatry Arena Veteran

    Hi Steve,
    Whilst I agree with most of what you say I would just like to clarify the Diploma-vs-Degree point (in this instance both being three-years full-time Courses).
    The old Diploma had more practical work and less academic work than the current Degree. Having originally qualified via the old Diploma route I can vouch for the clinical hours, and also the quality of teaching from external lecturers. I would say that we were trained every bit as thoroughly as Degree-trained Pods, the only omission being any grounding in research.

    Diplomas and Certs are not protected titles in the UK, and a Diploma or Cert Course in any subject can be as short or long as the Trainers choose.
    Clearly, as this thread aptly points out, a short Diploma or Cert is in no way comparable to a Degree.
     
  10. Steve The Footman

    Steve The Footman Active Member

    Thanks David. Obviously I was not really aware of the differences in the UK. It sounds like both ways had their advantages. I was speaking more generally I guess.

    In Queensland there is a large practical work load in the degree course. We do about 9 hours of patient contact a week from year two to year four. I know they do less in some other Australian courses.
     
  11. markjohconley

    markjohconley Well-Known Member

    Hi Steve, I think davidh's got it right. I'm also a 3 yr "Diploma" qualified, who had a vet, an engineer and a lawyer as 'classmates'. I felt, at the time of qualification, 1989, the diploma had more to offer than some of the degrees, who seemed to have some 'waffly' subjects early in their curriculum.
    Mark
     
  12. vontabago

    vontabago Member

    I think it is a bit silly going on about this debate. Nobody has stated the old diploma is no good and I know there are realy skilled practicioners out there with the old diploma.

    This discusion was started by somebody saying the home study foot practioners course is the same level as a degree. It is a pointless debate and I think most podiatrist are too professional to get involved with it.

    Although some some people do enjoy a bit of a stir up.

    Mark

    :boohoo:
     
  13. markjohconley

    markjohconley Well-Known Member

    So right Mark, well said. WUM's !!!! downright PITA's eh?
     
  14. davidh

    davidh Podiatry Arena Veteran

    Hi Mark,
    The thread originator has not responded so I guess we must have convinced him/her of the differences between Podiatrts and FHPs:confused:.

    I was not defending the Diploma (don't feel I need to), merely pointing out that the 3-year Diploma had some good + points in response to Steve's post.

    Cheers,
     
  15. Steve The Footman

    Steve The Footman Active Member

    By the sounds of it the three year degree that preceded the four year degree in Queensland was probably more like the diploma course that preceded the degree course in the UK. I can certainly attest to the waffly subjects padding out first year in the four year course. They seem to be there to cull out those who either will not make it or who are not really interested.

    My original post was in response to the first post and it appeared that the diploma he was talking about was more what you would get from a technical college. Not knowing that the degree course was preceded by another diploma course in the UK I was talking generally about the differences with a university vs other education.

    It sounds like there was little difference in quality between the diploma course and the degree course. While courses evolve and should reflect and teach new theories, I think nothing beats a high practical component treating patients.
     
  16. AH29

    AH29 Active Member

    FHP's are the biggest threat to podiatry now. It's a matter of time before they venture into podiatric surgery and that will really confuse things. There's nothing to stop them. They already do nail surgery, biomech, etc. Watch this space.

    :(
     
  17. blinda

    blinda MVP

    Bollox- the greatest threat to podiatry is podiatrists. FHPs do not undertake any procedures that require LA (eg nail surgery) or have any other annotations awarded at level 6 in HE that set Pods apart from FHPs, who practice at level 4. If you feel threatened by Foot Care Assistants (the NHS roles that FHPs are filling) then why did you bother studying podiatry?
     
  18. AH29

    AH29 Active Member


    What a load of crap. FHP's do nail surgery. There are courses run by smae that teaches them. Like I said, matter of time before they start dabbling in podiatric surgery. They just need a pioneer.
     
  19. blinda

    blinda MVP

    No. They do not. They cannot use LA and are taught to do `partial nail resections` (ie: removal of a spike of nail if it is in the distal portion of the nail unit) not avulsions, or surgery . If the spike is more proximal they are urged to refer the patient to a podiatrist. But, don`t take my word for it - ask them yourself as you made the allegation.
     
  20. Alan Whitby

    Alan Whitby Member

    I think the main point I take from this is that at basic level, podiatrists and FHPs do the same work, and basic level covers 90% of foot care. In this scenario, in the wonderful world of private practice, having good people skills is essential. So some FHPs flourish and the odd podiatrist might struggle, and it is nothing to do with clinical skills. And before anyone questions, I am a grandparented pod with forty years practice behind me and have always been more than happy to refer on any patient who needs something more than I can offer.
     
  21. Catfoot

    Catfoot Well-Known Member

    "I think the main point I take from this is that at basic level, podiatrists and FHPs do the same work,"

    I just wondered what you define as 'basic level'? Could you elucidate? Thanks.
     
  22. Alan Whitby

    Alan Whitby Member


    NCC work - nails, corns, callosities. Also known a little disparagingly as CCA - cut and come again. But (and it is a big BUT) those doing what I termed as working at "basic level" should have sufficient knowledge to know when to refer on.

    As opposed to an earlier poster's description of the scope of modern podiatry - trained in administration of regional anaesthesia, taught nail surgery techniques...prescribers, administrators of corticosteroid injections and other advanced techniques.
     
  23. Brian A. Rothbart

    Brian A. Rothbart Active Member

    Hey folks. We need to stick together and not be divided.

    I remember one specific day in 1972 when I went to University Hospital for Orthopedic rounds (foot and knee ward). I was really enjoying myself. Learning a great deal, looking at very difficult cases. Then the bomb dropped! I was asked where my orthopedic practice was located. I told them I was a Podiatrist, not an orthopedist. They became very agitated. I was told to leave immediately. That podiatrists were not welcomed in their hospital.

    At that time there was a schism between orthopedists and podiatrists. Let's not repeat that experience between podiatrists and FHPs.
     
  24. Catfoot

    Catfoot Well-Known Member

    [QUOTE="
    At that time there was a schism between orthopedists and podiatrists. Let's not repeat that experience between podiatrists and FHPs.[/QUOTE]

    I'm sorry professor you're a bit late to the party.

    There is already a schism between the two groups of practitioners.

    This is entirely due to the activities of FHPs, most of whom do nothing to engender any respect from HCPC Registered Chiropodists/Podiatrists.

    They confuse Joe Public by promoting themselves as being "specialists, "fully qualified in all aspects of footcare" etc.

    They are minimally trained. Some courses now exist that have no practical content. Once they have a paper qulaification they have to seek their own practical experinece by paying for someone to mentor them for a day - yes, a day !
    In my experience they don't refer on or ask for advice.
    They work 'under the radar' using mobile phones and no listed address, so if a patient has a problem they can't be contacted. They leave their mobiles set to 'answer' most of the time so they can screen their calls. My experience is that the only time I know they exist in my area is when they cease trading, disappear into the ether and leave their patients in the lurch. Then my 'phone starts ringing.

    I don't know where you practice but this is the situation here in UK.
     
  25. Brian A. Rothbart

    Brian A. Rothbart Active Member

    I graduated from the Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine (Cleveland Ohio) then earned my PhD in degenerative diseases.
    I was not aware of the situation in the UK. Obviously different then the one I experienced in the United States.
     
Loading...

Share This Page