Reinventing Osteopathic Medicine - Join NOW

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

One more comment:

I think that this thread shows how tone deaf many (but not all) people in medicine are to things like marketing and public perception. The reason that DMD=DDS is not because people inherently know the difference. Most people, especially nonprofessionals, do not look at the post-nominals behind a doctor's name. They just know that they are a "doctor." Period. This is literally only an issue because we allow it to be within our own spheres of influence. Why do you think nursing fights for the DNP? Not once have I seen them advocating for an MD degree. Why? Because they know it doesn't matter. All that matters is convincing state legislatures, one by one, to slowly expand their scope of practice.

The best thing that could be done would be to act like there is no difference, especially around each other. Cultural changes within the osteopathic profession would go a long way toward ending this debate.

Except people are getting more knowledgeable about all the wrong things. They see naturopathy and homeopathy and other unscientific nonsense as being valid and having a degree and title that looks less like Md and more like those is dangerous.

Personally my belief is that state levels need tmake it so that medicine is not allowed in any title that is not a medical physician or we need to consolidate titles.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[BuddyTheElf]

On a separate note, is this thing even real or is it a phisphing website? ACOP? I thought the organizations were all ACOFP, ACOI, ACOEP, etc. Did I just miss ACOP?

ACOP is for pediatricians I believe.

 

[hallowmann]

ACOP is for pediatricians I believe.

Yeah, but the OP is saying its by the American College of Osteopathic Physicians, not Pediatricians. I find the site, OP, etc. a bit shady, I would recommend against putting your personal info on it (which apparently you have to do in order to "Join FREE"), until more is revealed about it.

 

[Hakuna Matata]

Yeah, but the OP is saying its by the American College of Osteopathic Physicians, not Pediatricians. I find the site, OP, etc. a bit shady, I would recommend against putting your personal info on it (which apparently you have to do in order to "Join FREE"), until more is revealed about it.

Yeah, ACOP is for Pediatricians. Not sure what they mean by the American College of Osteopathic Physicians.... definitely sketch.

 

[MedicineMike]

The terms 'osteopathy' or 'osteopath' make me shutter.

DO heads need to cut the BS and stop trying to make us separate but equal. It is impossible to move forward that way.

-End the BS OMM teaching.
-End the constant stroking of AT Still
-Progress with the changing face of medicine and quit reminiscing on the past
-provide evidence if you want us to believe OMM works (still waiting on that)
-end the absurdity that is OMT in the hospital. Talking about increasing patient costs for no reason. It is literally a freaking joke that we can bill for some of the stuff we do. If insurance companies actually knew some of this crap, there would be an end to all OMM reimbursement

 

[omgroll]

While my sister is popping sugar pills (glyconutrients hahahaha!!!!) following her acupuncturist's (who calls himself "doctor") advice. By doctor I mean a thief and by advice I mean scam.

 

[costales]

OP: For this "annual OMA-ACOP conference" in San Diego advertised on your website, where is the contact info? When will you send out the name of the venue? Will there be a secret signal so members can recognize each other?

Hey, OMA does sound better than OMG.

 

[NOsaintsfan]

The change that some seek needs to come in the form of a revised philosophy rather than different initials. The DO profession as a whole has been clinging to the idea of "distinctiveness" for a long time and in my opinion that's a good thing. The issue I have is HOW we are distinct. The current line is we are distinct because we are more holistic in our approach and primarily because we learn OMM. This is what needs to change in my opinion.

The issue is that many outside the DO community don't actually know what OMM is. Some think its sort of this combo between physical therapy and chiropractic techniques. What those people don't know is that MUCH of the OMM teaching is based on nothing more than a belief. Yes, a belief that has no proof or verifiability outside of antidotal accounts.

What am I talking about you ask? Here is one example. Cranial. It is taught that the CSF pulsates rhythmically throughout the entire dural space with a pressure of ~10 psi. Trained individuals can feel this pulsation by palpating any point in the body (the ankle for example). Techniques exist (straight sinus release) where you can redirect this CSF flow with the power of your thoughts projected upon a patient. Yes, that's correct, the physicians thoughts directed toward their patient can alter the patients CSF flow. This is actually taught as part of the OMM curriculum. NO research has been done to measure its effectiveness or verify if it even works. Stuff like this shows up on DO board exams.

So where am I going with this, what's my point? I feel that the distinctiveness of the osteopathic profession should be based NOT on OMM but rather on the fact that as osteopaths we are willing to consider and RESEARCH treatment modalities that don't involve the conventional use of surgery or pharmaceuticals.

As I illustrated in my above example much of OMM is based on belief almost like a "faith". The change that needs to come about is one where RESEARCH into OMM modalities and techniques are made a priority. Cranial techniques might work! However we need to prove it. We shouldn't be afraid of the research and the results that may come from it. If Chapman's points can't effectively be proven to exist then they need to be taken out of the curriculum. If they do exist how reliable are they in aiding a diagnosis? Does treating Chapman's points improve patient outcomes? Once those questions are answered then the curriculum should be updated to reflect that. This is the line of thought the profession should take in my opinion.

How does this advance the osteopathic profession you wonder? If OMM treatments can be proven and backed by reproducible research then they will be adopted by the medical community as a whole. By this I mean MDs. Does rib raising shorten hospital stays for pneumonia patients? I don't know but if it does you can bet that it will become the standard of care. See where I'm going with this?

I write this not because I want to see an end to OMM, on the contrary I want OMM techniques to become part of the standard of care. This will only strengthen the DO distinctiveness and solidify our place as solid contributors to the advancement of medicine.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

I don't know much about OMM beyond seeing some of it while shadowing, so bare with me a bit.

Is OMM a competence really suited for a doctor or is it one more suited to a physical therapist? I mean just because it does work does it validate the time it takes to do it and as such takes away from a job that may be only possible by a doctor?

I mean we can learn other techniques that do what you say. But why? Other careers do that, and were specialized not general.

Furthermore is OMM something that needs a medical school education to accomplish? And as such why not relegate it to lower level careers that specialize in manipulation therapy?

And what happens when studies are done, the effects aren't large enough to validate their existence? What will happen to the distinctiveness?

I mean as a whole I'm sure some of OMM will be proven valid by research. But is it all that important to know how to deal with back pain when you can send a patient to a trained expert who is dedicated to spending more than 15 minutes on them?

Finally I think medicine is changing and becoming more and more technological. Do you believe OMM even if proven correct will always be a valid use of time? I mean less than 10% of DOs use it now, but why?

 

[NOsaintsfan]

I don't know much about OMM beyond seeing some of it while shadowing, so bare with me a bit.

Is OMM a competence really suited for a doctor or is it one more suited to a physical therapist? I mean just because it does work does it validate the time it takes to do it and as such takes away from a job that may be only possible by a doctor?

I mean we can learn other techniques that do what you say. But why? Other careers do that, and were specialized not general.

Furthermore is OMM something that needs a medical school education to accomplish? And as such why not relegate it to lower level careers that specialize in manipulation therapy?

And what happens when studies are done, the effects aren't large enough to validate their existence? What will happen to the distinctiveness?

I mean as a whole I'm sure some of OMM will be proven valid by research. But is it all that important to know how to deal with back pain when you can send a patient to a trained expert who is dedicated to spending more than 15 minutes on them?

Finally I think medicine is changing and becoming more and more technological. Do you believe OMM even if proven correct will always be a valid use of time? I mean less than 10% of DOs use it now, but why?

Less than 10% use it because much of OMM has little research proving its effectiveness. That doesn't mean it doesn't work, its just that no good studies have been done from much of it to study its effectiveness. It also takes practice to be good at it, this takes time.

OMM is a tool at your disposal that can help treat patients, just like pharmaceuticals and surgery are. Sometimes it can correct a dysfunction and be all a patient needs to get better, other times it can be an adjunct to meds/other treatment to help speed recovery or ease discomfort. So in my opinion, yes, it should be taught to physicians.

My issue is that more research should be done to quantify its effectiveness on patient outcomes. By doing that it can become part of the standard of care and adopted by all physicians (MD and DO). This and the advancement of OMM/alternative treatment techniques based on sound verifiable research should be osteopaths contribution to medicine (among other things) and why we are distinct. This is my opinion of course. Others will disagree.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Why happens if OMM doesn't work or it's effect is inferior to other things...
I.e chapman points vs walking. Apparently you move more lymphatic stuff through walking than through chapman points in some articles.

What will happen then?

What are circumstances in which OMM solves medical proves beyond back pain? That is legit the only uses I've seen in shadowing and even then it's mostly used as a temp and most send you to a PT.

 

[NOsaintsfan]

Why happens if OMM doesn't work or it's effect is inferior to other things...
I.e chapman points vs walking. Apparently you move more lymphatic stuff through walking than through chapman points in some articles.

What will happen then?

What are circumstances in which OMM solves medical proves beyond back pain? That is legit the only uses I've seen in shadowing and even then it's mostly used as a temp and most send you to a PT.

Then you are upfront and open about the research showing chapman's not being effective and move on researching other modalities that can have a positive effect on patient outcomes. That's what medicine in general is supposed to do, evolve as knowledge advances.

I know you don't know anything about OMM really but their are treatments outside of the MSK realm that can potentially shorten hospital stays and improve recovery ect. For example the lymphatic pump has shown the potential to reduce hospital stays for pneumonia patients, however the study that was done had a small sample size. That should be followed up on. There is more, that's just one example.

 

[Mehd School]

Perpetual crap of this nature is another reason why SDN gets a bad name.

 

[babdoc]

Perpetual crap of this nature is another reason why SDN gets a bad name.

I've been off SDN for a week while on vacation and almost just threw up when I saw this thread.

 

[JStew32]

The terms 'osteopathy' or 'osteopath' make me shutter.

DO heads need to cut the BS and stop trying to make us separate but equal. It is impossible to move forward that way.

-End the BS OMM teaching.
-End the constant stroking of AT Still
-Progress with the changing face of medicine and quit reminiscing on the past
-provide evidence if you want us to believe OMM works (still waiting on that)
-end the absurdity that is OMT in the hospital. Talking about increasing patient costs for no reason. It is literally a freaking joke that we can bill for some of the stuff we do. If insurance companies actually knew some of this crap, there would be an end to all OMM reimbursement

I agree with all of this. It is almost a religion.

I also think the initials should be changed or modified.

 

[DocEspana]

I've been off SDN for a week while on vacation and almost just threw up when I saw this thread.

Agreed.

And they won't let it die. Be merciful to a suffering thread. Put it out of its misery.

 

[GUH]

Show me an MD acceptance and I will believe you chose a DO school. And the purpose is to bring a new voice into the future of our profession.

That's a silly thing to say.