NH PT Juris common mistakes
NH PT Juris · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Treating 'direct access' as unlimited practice and evaluating and treating a patient for an undiagnosed condition without determining whether the complaint requires a referral or whether the patient should be seen by a physician first.
Candidates memorize that New Hampshire allows treatment without a physician referral and then stop reading; they miss the conditions and limits attached to that access, so they answer every direct-access scenario as 'treat freely.'
What to do instead
Build a one-page decision tree for the first visit: screen for red flags, determine whether the condition is within the scope of physical therapy, identify when referral or consultation is required, and note the documentation that must accompany the decision. Walk through three contrasting vignettes (musculoskeletal complaint, suspected non-musculoskeletal condition, patient already under a physician's care) and write the correct action for each.
Assigning an evaluation, reassessment, interpretation of test results, development of the plan of care, or modification of the plan of care to a physical therapist assistant or aide.
Candidates blur the line between 'the PTA carries out the intervention' and 'the PTA makes clinical judgments,' and exam items are written specifically to test that boundary using tasks that sound routine.
What to do instead
Memorize a two-column list: tasks only the PT may perform versus tasks a PTA may perform under direction and supervision. For every practice question involving delegation, ask 'does this task require clinical judgment, initial evaluation, or plan modification?' If yes, it belongs to the PT regardless of how simple the task sounds.
Assuming one supervision level applies to all settings and all support personnel, and answering supervision questions without first identifying whether the person is a PTA, an aide, or a student, and whether the setting is inpatient, outpatient, home health, or a facility.
Supervision rules vary by personnel type and by practice setting, and candidates who study a single summary table apply the outpatient rule to every scenario.
What to do instead
Create a matrix with personnel type on one axis and setting on the other, and fill in the required supervision level, on-site presence, and co-signature requirements for each cell. Practice by reading the setting in the question stem first, before reading the answer choices.
Completing documentation late, omitting the elements the record must contain (evaluation findings, plan of care, goals, interventions, patient response, changes in condition), or altering a record without a dated, attributable addendum.
Candidates treat documentation items as common sense and skip them, but the exam tests specific required content and the correct method for correcting an error.
What to do instead
Memorize the required content of an initial evaluation, progress note, and discharge summary, and memorize the correction method: single line, initial and date, no obliteration, no backdating. Write one model note for each note type from memory and compare it against the required elements list.
Answering informed-consent questions by choosing 'the patient signed the form' as sufficient, without addressing capacity, voluntariness, disclosure of risks and alternatives, or the patient's right to refuse or withdraw consent.
Candidates equate consent with paperwork, and exam items deliberately present a signed form attached to a patient who did not understand the treatment or was not given alternatives.
What to do instead
Learn consent as a process with four elements: capacity, disclosure, comprehension, and voluntariness. For each practice scenario, ask who is authorized to consent (patient, guardian, health care agent) and whether the patient was given the right to decline. Treat a signed form as evidence of consent only when the process elements are also present.
Failing to recognize and act on a boundary crossing or a suspected boundary violation, such as accepting gifts with strings attached, treating a friend or family member, or entering a personal relationship with a patient or former patient.
Candidates judge these scenarios by whether harm actually occurred rather than by whether the behavior crosses a professional boundary, so they pick 'no action needed' when the relationship felt benign.
What to do instead
Study boundary issues as categories: dual relationships, self-disclosure, gifts, social media contact, and physical contact. For each, decide the correct response (avoid, disclose and consult, transfer care, document). Practice identifying the earliest point at which the therapist should act, not the point at which harm becomes visible.
Failing to report suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a child, an older adult, or a dependent adult, or reporting it to a supervisor or employer instead of the designated authority.
Candidates assume internal reporting satisfies the obligation, or they hesitate because they are unsure whether their suspicion meets the threshold.
What to do instead
Memorize the mandatory-reporting trigger (reasonable suspicion, not proof), the populations covered, and the requirement to report to the designated state authority within the required timeframe. Learn that internal notification supplements but does not replace the external report, and that good-faith reports are protected.
Confusing the board's role with that of a professional association or a court, and answering complaint-process questions by describing criminal prosecution, malpractice litigation, or association ethics proceedings instead of the regulatory complaint and disciplinary process.
Candidates blend all oversight bodies into one and have not learned the sequence of a board complaint from filing through investigation, opportunity to respond, hearing, and sanction.
What to do instead
Draw the complaint flow as a numbered sequence and label who does what at each step. Separately list the types of disciplinary action the board may impose and distinguish them from civil liability and criminal penalty. For each practice question, identify which body is acting before choosing an answer.
Treating continuing competence as a single number of hours and ignoring the specific requirements for the renewal cycle, such as the categories of acceptable activity, documentation retention, and the consequences of a lapsed license.
Candidates rely on a remembered hour count from another state or an older cycle and never verify the categories and recordkeeping rules.
What to do instead
Build a renewal checklist: cycle length, total requirement, permitted activity categories and any caps, documentation to retain and for how long, and the rule for practicing on a lapsed license. Verify each item against the current board rule rather than memory, and flag anything you cannot confirm.
Answering scope-of-practice questions by choosing the broadest permitted action rather than the action authorized for that specific provider and setting, and ignoring licensure requirements such as practicing on an expired or inactive license or on a student or provisional status.
Candidates equate 'within the profession's scope' with 'within my scope right now,' and exam items test the difference using a license status or a provider type buried in the stem.
What to do instead
Read every stem for two facts before answering: who is providing the service, and what is their current license or authorization status. Then apply the scope rule for that provider. Keep a short list of what each status (student, graduate, provisional, active, inactive, expired) does and does not permit.