Local athletic trainers back push for state licensing program
A football player bangs helmets with another during a high school game. One gets up slowly, a little stunned.
Off the field, someone asks him how he is. “I’m fine, just got my bell rung. I can go back in,” he says. He didn’t lose consciousness and doesn’t have a headache. He knows where he is and can see straight.
Should he go back in?
Who determines that, particularly in California, wields a huge influence on that athlete’s future — possibly even his life.
A certified athletic trainer would likely pull him and send him through a weeklong concussion protocol with a step-by-step return-to-play checklist that monitors his symptoms.
But California doesn’t require its athletic trainers to be licensed, which allows just about anyone on the sideline to make that determination.
“Someone could just say they’re an athletic trainer and work and function as an athletic trainer, and there’s no real law against it. That’s dangerous,” said Monica Ohkubo, the head athletic trainer and director of the athletic training program at Santa Rosa Junior College.
California is the only state in the nation that does not require licensure or regulation of such medical professionals, entrusted with the care of hundreds of thousands of high school, college and professional athletes who play in the state every day.
Newly introduced legislation aims to change that.
Assembly Bill 1510, introduced last month by Assemblyman Matt Dababneh (D-Encino), would require licensure and regulation of athletic trainers by an existing occupational therapy oversight board and impose disciplinary action for those who work without proper licensing.
It would also create a scope of practice, codifying what athletic trainers can and can’t do in a medical setting.
Santa Rosa’s Ohkubo and others hail the effort to get California on the same page as other states — both for athletes’ safety and to ensure legal protection for athletic trainers and their employers.
According to the California Athletic Trainers’ Association, which is sponsoring the bill, many school districts do not require any athletic training education or certification, and about 30 percent of those calling themselves athletic trainers in high schools are unqualified for the role.
That poses a significant hidden risk to those seeking medical treatment, the CATA argues. Unqualified employees acting as athletic trainers in high schools run the gamut from coaches and teachers to administrative personnel and other staff.
The legislation has support from the NCAA, American Medical Society for Sports Medicine, American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine, the National Federation of State High School Associations and more than two dozen other related organizations.
No one has registered any opposition to the bill, although in past versions organizations representing nurses, physical therapists, occupational therapists and teachers have challenged the idea. Their concerns focus on the existence of already qualified practitioners and the proposed scope of practice, which they viewed as too broad, which might overlap with their professions.
Many athletic trainers in California have passed state or national certification exams, but those backing the bill argue that’s not enough.
“Anyone can say they are an athletic trainer by saying they are. It’s that simple,” said Tom Abdenour, former head athletic trainer for the Golden State Warriors and San Diego State University.