I would support 20 CRCEUs every 2 years even though I feel that CEU are a poor way to determine competence.

Retesting is the gold standard but cost prohibited.

CRCEU are a must to ensure the quality of the educational units. 

I would like to speak in favor of the proposed continuing education units for Respiratory Practioners.  I feel that practioners should be encouraged to seek CRCE's vs CEU's related to the practice of Respiratory Care.  As a manager of a small community hospital I also feel confident that the ability to obtain and maintain continuing educations would not be a issue or cost prohibitive for practioners within our state. 

What is the definition of inactive status?  Does it also include a RT managerial position that never does direct patient care?  First, inactive must be clearly defined.  Then, how will inactive versus active status be monitored by the board?  I have difficulty understanding how this can be regulated as I don't know how the board really knows a RT is actively practicing.  It seems to be an area better left to the employer to decide whether a RT meets the institution's RT competencies.  If it is regulated, I am not in favor of retesting therapists to return to active status, but instead, to work under supervision for a set # of hours.  Requiring retesting may only add to current shortages of RTs. 

I support contining education for the practice of Respiratory Care in the form of CRCE or CEU's.  I do not feel that 15-20 bi-annually would be to much to require to insure current and update knowledge of our practice.  I also have student concerns, some of which are, could students be allowed to have a grace period after graduating to take their boards while employed as a graduate therapist?  I think nursing has a three month grace period and feel this would be suffienct for others also.  I would like to see some action regarding CEU's, it seems like we have waited a long time for some resolution.

I think that 20 hours of CEU's is reasonable for 2 years.  It would depend on the definition of a CEU, because many institutions do not have formal educational processes in place. I don't think they should require retesting after inactive, because of the expense and timing issues.  I really think that supervised work is a better option.  I would think that institutions should have a probationary period in place so that they need to be supervised for a period of time anyway. 

I would like to speak in favor of the proposal to require continuing education credits for respiratory therapists. I am in favor of a minimum of 20 AARC approved CRCEU's biannually. This standard has been set in most states that have licensed respiratory care practitioners and is the average required by 35 states. CRCEU's do not necessarily prove competency but they do however indicate that licensed therapists in Virginia are staying current on the latest information available. CRCEU's are accessable to respiratory therapists and would not cause undue burden.

As a licensed respiratory care practitioner (RCP) in Virginia, I strongly support the proposal that would require all RCPs to complete a minimum of 20 continuing education units (CEUs), biannually, in order to maintain current active status as a RCP in Virginia.

While completing these CEUs will not guarantee competency in all areas of respiratory care practice, it will encourage RCPs to attend activities where they can be informed, and perhaps updated and educated, on current trends and practices in respiratory care.  Many CEU opportunities have become available through professional organizations, such as the American Association for Respiratory Care, Virginia Society for Respirtory Care, and organizations employing respiratory therapists, thus allowing for RCPs to obtain the proposed CEUs in a reasonalbe amount of time. 

Because of the subspecialization of respiratory therapists in many healthcare environments today, I endorse the CE alternative to mandatory retesting for RCP wishing to maintain current active status.