Advantages of the Merger?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
S

SKaminski

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
292
Reaction score
44
Members don't see this ad.
Hey everyone,

I was reading over the "Save The Merger" thread recently and im curious: How do D.O. students benefit from the Merger? It seems to me that D.O. students (who take the USMLE) can already apply for allopathic residencies.

As far as I can tell, the Merger will reduce my chances of getting into a competitive residency. Let's say i wanted to get into dermatology (I don't, but lets pretend). Before I was competing against other students who had to spend 200+ hours on OMM, but now i'll be competing with a ton of students who havn't.

So, what are the advantages of the merger? Why do we want to save it? What benefit do D.O. students get?
 
Saving the merger is currently a debate about discrimination. Im asking about the relative merits of the merger. Please only comment if you can stay on topic.
 
That's what I am saying... Every other thread discussing this topic brings up the merits and cons to the merger. You can find your answers by reading those threads.

Sent from my RM-917_nam_usa_100 using Tapatalk
 
Let's face it OP… you won't land derm. At least there's always those YouTube blackhead extraction flicks!
 
We get 28% representation in the ACGME, which means that we are safe from losing further access to ACGME (AOA internship/ACGME fellowship after AOA residency). It also means that internationally, particularly in Canada, you get greater access. There's nothing currently to indicate MDs will be able to walk in without doing OMM training.
 
AlbinoHawk DO said:
We get 28% representation in the ACGME, which means that we are safe from losing further access to ACGME (AOA internship/ACGME fellowship after AOA residency). It also means that internationally, particularly in Canada, you get greater access. There's nothing currently to indicate MDs will be able to walk in without doing OMM training.
Click to expand...


Thank you! You bring up a valid point by suggesting that MDs may need to perform omm training, but that remains to be seen.
 
SKaminski said:
Thank you! You bring up a valid point by suggesting that MDs may need to perform omm training, but that remains to be seen.
Click to expand...
Actually, I've not seen a single person argue that MDs should get in without any OMM training.

Another potential advantage is that we can break down reasons for discrimination. I was talking to a Pain doctor at work and he told me that if DO doctors have ACGME training and take the USMLE that he'd consider the case that the education is equivalent. Another argument I saw from @DocEspana is that the students that go into top specialties in AOA such as derm, ent and others tend to be stronger students than the average MD counterparts, so it's not like all of a sudden a student that couldn't make it on ACGME derm is magically as strong as a DO candidate at AOA programs.
 
AlbinoHawk DO said:
Actually, I've not seen a single person argue that MDs should get in without any OMM training.

Another potential advantage is that we can break down reasons for discrimination. I was talking to a Pain doctor at work and he told me that if DO doctors have ACGME training and take the USMLE that he'd consider the case that the education is equivalent. Another argument I saw from @DocEspana is that the students that go into top specialties in AOA such as derm, ent and others tend to be stronger students than the average MD counterparts, so it's not like all of a sudden a student that couldn't make it on ACGME derm is magically as strong as a DO candidate at AOA programs.
Click to expand...
@DermViser did say that omm is not used in aoa derm. Let's be real here. How useful do you think omm will be in real clinical settings? How many times do you think you will use it per month?

And i'm gonna need proof that aoa derm, ent, and others are more competitive than their average md counterparts. I've seen people post evidence that points to the contrary, at least for ortho.

The only benefit that I see is that do's can now finally compete with md's for the same converted aoa spots. It will be a pride thing for do's and we can now finally make a more direct comparison of the stats of mds to dos, instead of making dubious claims with little proof.
 
spftmakeiesr said:
you won't land derm. At least there's always those YouTube blackhead extraction flicks!
1klZp2k
Click to expand...

Somebody lost a stupid parrot.
 
Xenoblade said:
@DermViser did say that omm is not used in aoa derm. Let's be real here. How useful do you think omm will be in real clinical settings? How many times do you think you will use it per month?

And i'm gonna need proof that aoa derm, ent, and others are more competitive than their average md counterparts. I've seen people post evidence that points to the contrary, at least for ortho.

The only benefit that I see is that do's can now finally compete with md's for the same converted aoa spots. It will be a pride thing for do's and we can now finally make a more direct comparison of the stats of mds to dos, instead of making dubious claims with little proof.
Click to expand...
This is not necessarily directly at you Xeno, more or less just something to throw out onto the thread.
The thing is its not like MDs are being all mean and unfair by saying a higher qualified DO = a lesser qualified MD (for residencies). The DOs are going to do the exact same thing to the MDs. For those MDs trying to make it into those AOA competitive residencies, they are not only going to face the high quality of the DO applicants which they would naturally face in the ACGME residencies, they will face discrimination because they are an MD and have never done OMM and gone through the DO "right of passage" (or whatever excuse AOA PDs can come up with). The door is going to swing both ways. I do not imagine that AOA PDs will be so quick to just drop their spots saved for their DOs and just hand them over to MDs.

I think there will be a minority of PDs on both sides of the wall who truly are completely altruistic and morally fair who will just say, whoever has the best scores and is the best fit gets the spot. Hopefully this number will grow with time and through further understanding of what each degree means. But realistically the majority will still prefer (thats not to say they will ONLY take, just prefer) a graduate with letters similar to theirs. This will be true both for AOA and ACGME residencies. The only way that this would not happen is if AOA PDs are in fact booted from their current positions, which there is talk of that happening. IF that is the case then yea, the DOs are screwed when it comes to competitive residencies. But that is unlikely... so here is what you realistically gain:

1) The ability to do fellowships as a DO (or at least not having the fellowships closed off to DOs - this is one of the only major threats that was actually coming to fruition prior to the merger)
2) Being able to have high quality residencies (The ACGME could have just closed the doors and then hundreds of DOs would have been screwed)
2B)-The standard for AOA residencies will also be brought up to ACGME levels over time, which is definitely positive for making quality physicians
3) Hopefully a gradual understanding of what DOs are about and thus less stigma behind the degree
 
Last edited:
Awesome Sauceome said:
This is not necessarily directly at you Xeno, more or less just something to throw out onto the thread.
The thing is its not like MDs are being all mean and unfair by saying a higher qualified DO = a lesser qualified MD (for residencies). The DOs are going to do the exact same thing to the MDs. For those MDs trying to make it into those AOA competitive residencies, they are not only going to face the high quality of the DO applicants which they would naturally face in the ACGME residencies, they will face discrimination because they are an MD and have never done OMM and gone through the DO "right of passage" (or whatever excuse AOA PDs can come up with). The door is going to swing both ways. I do not imagine that AOA PDs will be so quick to just drop their spots saved for their DOs and just hand them over to MDs.

I think there will be a minority of PDs on both sides of the wall who truly are completely altruistic and morally fair who will just say, whoever has the best scores and is the best fit gets the spot. Hopefully this number will grow with time and through further understanding of what each degree means. But realistically the majority will still prefer (thats not to say they will ONLY take, just prefer) a graduate with letters similar to theirs. This will be true both for AOA and ACGME residencies. The only way that this would not happen is if AOA PDs are in fact booted from their current positions, which there is talk of that happening. IF that is the case then yea, the DOs are screwed when it comes to competitive residencies. But that is unlikely... so here is what you realistically gain:

1) The ability to do fellowships as a DO (or at least not having the fellowships closed off to DOs - this is one of the only major threats that was actually coming to fruition prior to the merger)
2) Being able to have high quality residencies (The ACGME could have just closed the doors and then hundreds of DOs would have been screwed)
2B)-The standard for AOA residencies will also be brought up to ACGME levels over time, which is definitely positive for making quality physicians
3) Hopefully a gradual understanding of what DOs are about and thus less stigma behind the degree
Click to expand...
All will be revealed. I welcome the competition. The do ortho, plastics, ent, and Neuro surg program in this one hospital close to me will start accepting mds because they did so less than 10 years ago before they lost their acgme accreditation. N = 1, but that one is in my backyard and I'll rank it if I get interviewed.
 
Last edited:
Xenoblade said:
@DermViser did say that omm is not used in aoa derm. Let's be real here. How useful do you think omm will be in real clinical settings? How many times do you think you will use it per month?

And i'm gonna need proof that aoa derm, ent, and others are more competitive than their average md counterparts. I've seen people post evidence that points to the contrary, at least for ortho.

The only benefit that I see is that do's can now finally compete with md's for the same converted aoa spots. It will be a pride thing for do's and we can now finally make a more direct comparison of the stats of mds to dos, instead of making dubious claims with little proof.
Click to expand...
AOA Dermatology is suing to keep OGME. Do you honestly believe they won't want to put the OMM requirement to their residencies? I think they generally use OMM about 0 times a month, but I don't see your point there. It's still an excuse to use.

I don't know where you're getting this pride thing going on. I certainly don't care about my MD counterparts and what they can access and compete for. I care about my residency placement.
 
Xenoblade said:
@DermViser did say that omm is not used in aoa derm. Let's be real here. How useful do you think omm will be in real clinical settings? How many times do you think you will use it per month?

And i'm gonna need proof that aoa derm, ent, and others are more competitive than their average md counterparts. I've seen people post evidence that points to the contrary, at least for ortho.

The only benefit that I see is that do's can now finally compete with md's for the same converted aoa spots. It will be a pride thing for do's and we can now finally make a more direct comparison of the stats of mds to dos, instead of making dubious claims with little proof.
Click to expand...

My point was a bit different. That the lowest common denominator is higher in the competitive AOA fields than the ACGME fields. Not that the full population mean is. It's not. But if you're worried about losing spots, you need to look at the lowest common denominator. The urology and ophth students self-regulate and make their scores known in semi-anonymous format (so you know what scores come from DOs but not which DOs). If you insert the DOs into the MD accepted candidate list you pretty much see them spread out pretty evenly from about the 60th percentile to the 20th. And you don't see any below that because only DOs who failed to match would fall into the area that still holds ~20% of the MDs who did match. Obviously year to year the exact numbers vary, but the trend has held for the three years I watched the urology list of that info and the two years I watched the ophtho list. Also per two ENT relatives (one MD, one DO who wanted me to go ENT), same holds for ENT.

It's pointless to worry about people who are at the cream of the crop in either accredited group. They won't ever lose spots. The movement might come at the people who squeaked into a spot. And if the match process post merger is fair at all (I can't promise it will be, but I think it will) then the lowest common DO denominator will be stronger on paper (ignoring "what's your degree" criteria) than the lowest common denominator MD pushing for those spots (and , more importantly, the unmatched MDs)
 
I wouldn't necessarily assume deem would follow my analysis though because AOA derm is an odd animal. And ortho in the AOA can be a bit nepotistic and favoritist, so idk if those confound things at all.

But I would feel extremely comfortable putting neurosurgery and facial plastics from the AOA into there. I've met enough of those residents to know they're all as good as any MD candidate (and those are the only two AOA fields where I feel that way. Even uro and ophtho it's that DOs are within the accepted range, not that they're equivalent)
 
SKaminski said:
Hey everyone,
As far as I can tell, the Merger will reduce my chances of getting into a competitive residency. Let's say i wanted to get into dermatology (I don't, but lets pretend). Before I was competing against other students who had to spend 200+ hours on OMM, but now i'll be competing with a ton of students who havn't.
Click to expand...
I know you're being hypothetical, but I scoff every time someone says this.

Being against the merger for the sake of having an easier path to a competitive residency is hilarious.
 
GlowInTheDark said:
I know you're being hypothetical, but I scoff every time someone says this.

Being against the merger for the sake of having an easier path to a competitive residency is hilarious.
Click to expand...
I agree. Rise up to the competition and quit seeking the easy way out...
 
DocEspana said:
My point was a bit different. That the lowest common denominator is higher in the competitive AOA fields than the ACGME fields. Not that the full population mean is. It's not. But if you're worried about losing spots, you need to look at the lowest common denominator. The urology and ophth students self-regulate and make their scores known in semi-anonymous format (so you know what scores come from DOs but not which DOs). If you insert the DOs into the MD accepted candidate list you pretty much see them spread out pretty evenly from about the 60th percentile to the 20th. And you don't see any below that because only DOs who failed to match would fall into the area that still holds ~20% of the MDs who did match. Obviously year to year the exact numbers vary, but the trend has held for the three years I watched the urology list of that info and the two years I watched the ophtho list. Also per two ENT relatives (one MD, one DO who wanted me to go ENT), same holds for ENT.

It's pointless to worry about people who are at the cream of the crop in either accredited group. They won't ever lose spots. The movement might come at the people who squeaked into a spot. And if the match process post merger is fair at all (I can't promise it will be, but I think it will) then the lowest common DO denominator will be stronger on paper (ignoring "what's your degree" criteria) than the lowest common denominator MD pushing for those spots (and , more importantly, the unmatched MDs)
Click to expand...
I understand your argument, but where are the facts and studies that say this? No offense, but I cannot just take your word since we are both anonymous strangers to each other on the internet.
 
Find anyone you know who has done urology. Ask them to give you access to the "urologymatch Google doc". As far as I know, all 270 urology matched students are in there.
 
Xenoblade said:
I understand your argument, but where are the facts and studies that say this? No offense, but I cannot just take your word since we are both anonymous strangers to each other on the internet.
Click to expand...
I'm sure @cliquesh can find the statistics. 🙂.
 
Possibly the greatest advantage of the merger for OMS is a unified match. Presently you have to decide in some respects during first year, when you choose whether or not to take USMLE Step 1. Am I going for the AOA match or the ACGME match? People are afraid to put all their eggs in the latter basket, especially for middle-competitive specialties (EM, gas, etc) while for the most competitive they will currently default to the AOA match. Many students apply to only a few reach AOA programs, assuming they will fail to match, with less competitive ACGME programs (or an entirely different specialty) as their backup. With a unified match, we can apply to all programs in our field of interest without penalty.
 
Koan said:
Possibly the greatest advantage of the merger for OMS is a unified match. Presently you have to decide in some respects during first year, when you choose whether or not to take USMLE Step 1. Am I going for the AOA match or the ACGME match? People are afraid to put all their eggs in the latter basket, especially for middle-competitive specialties (EM, gas, etc) while for the most competitive they will currently default to the AOA match. Many students apply to only a few reach AOA programs, assuming they will fail to match, with less competitive ACGME programs (or an entirely different specialty) as their backup. With a unified match, we can apply to all programs in our field of interest without penalty.
Click to expand...
Sounds exciting, but if I am not mistaken, they have not hammered out an actual application system or anything where it would be a single match process.. correct? As of now they are just working on making everything up to ACGME code.
 
Until there is a unified match, I highly doubt there will be a lot of MDs applying to formerly AOA spots. Those that do will likely be bottom of the barrel candidates that are using the AOA match as a second shot to get into a competitive specialty. If top DO candidates lose out to the MDs that bother applying AOA, that's fine. The best positions should go to the best applicants.
 
Mad Jack said:
Until there is a unified match, I highly doubt there will be a lot of MDs applying to formerly AOA spots. Those that do will likely be bottom of the barrel candidates that are using the AOA match as a second shot to get into a competitive specialty. If top DO candidates lose out to the MDs that bother applying AOA, that's fine. The best positions should go to the best applicants.
Click to expand...
They should go to the best applicant and they most likely will.
 
Mad Jack said:
Until there is a unified match, I highly doubt there will be a lot of MDs applying to formerly AOA spots. Those that do will likely be bottom of the barrel candidates that are using the AOA match as a second shot to get into a competitive specialty. If top DO candidates lose out to the MDs that bother applying AOA, that's fine. The best positions should go to the best applicants.
Click to expand...

Bottom of the barrel MD being competitive enough to take competitive AOA spots from competitive DOs? Hmm... something isn't adding up there.
 
NeuroLAX said:
Bottom of the barrel MD being competitive enough to take competitive AOA spots from competitive DOs? Hmm... something isn't adding up there.
Click to expand...
My point was that those competitive DO applicants will not lose their spots to the likely uncompetitive MDs applying AOA. The only DOs that will lose their spots will likely be those that were long shots in a given specialty to begin with, which is fine.
 
On the concept of a combined match:

According to what I've read/heard, as AOA programs become accredited by the ACGME (if not provisionally accredited) they will automatically be removed from the AOA match and placed in the ACGME match. I could be wrong, but I think this was addressed during one of the town hall meetings immediately after the MOU was announced when the question was asked about a single match. Basically, the take away was that, as we approach 2020, more and more AOA programs will slowly begin to drop off the AOA match until there is essentially a "unified" match due to pure numbers alone. Only those programs that are struggling to attain accreditation will likely be under the AOA match come 2020. Further, I've heard that in some specialities there is already a rush to begin preparing for the 2015 application process. I wouldn't be surprised if you see nearly all of the very strong AOA programs begin the swap to the ACGME system by at least 2016.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, as I acknowledge that my understanding of the process may not be correct. The "advantage" of the above system is that each subsequent year of matching DO students will have to worry less and less about the two match process.
 
OCDEMS said:
On the concept of a combined match:

According to what I've read/heard, as AOA programs become accredited by the ACGME (if not provisionally accredited) they will automatically be removed from the AOA match and placed in the ACGME match. I could be wrong, but I think this was addressed during one of the town hall meetings immediately after the MOU was announced when the question was asked about a single match. Basically, the take away was that, as we approach 2020, more and more AOA programs will slowly begin to drop off the AOA match until there is essentially a "unified" match due to pure numbers alone. Only those programs that are struggling to attain accreditation will likely be under the AOA match come 2020. Further, I've heard that in some specialities there is already a rush to begin preparing for the 2015 application process. I wouldn't be surprised if you see nearly all of the very strong AOA programs begin the swap to the ACGME system by at least 2016.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, as I acknowledge that my understanding of the process may not be correct. The "advantage" of the above system is that each subsequent year of matching DO students will have to worry less and less about the two match process.
Click to expand...
seems legit
 
OCDEMS said:
On the concept of a combined match:

According to what I've read/heard, as AOA programs become accredited by the ACGME (if not provisionally accredited) they will automatically be removed from the AOA match and placed in the ACGME match. I could be wrong, but I think this was addressed during one of the town hall meetings immediately after the MOU was announced when the question was asked about a single match. Basically, the take away was that, as we approach 2020, more and more AOA programs will slowly begin to drop off the AOA match until there is essentially a "unified" match due to pure numbers alone. Only those programs that are struggling to attain accreditation will likely be under the AOA match come 2020. Further, I've heard that in some specialities there is already a rush to begin preparing for the 2015 application process. I wouldn't be surprised if you see nearly all of the very strong AOA programs begin the swap to the ACGME system by at least 2016.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, as I acknowledge that my understanding of the process may not be correct. The "advantage" of the above system is that each subsequent year of matching DO students will have to worry less and less about the two match process.
Click to expand...

Good point. I feel (in light of what a program director told me), many AOA programs will rush to gain ACGME accreditation, since they aren't naive to the fact that they will appear more attractive to DO applicants, since according to recent application history, the ratio of ACGME:AOA applicants has approached near 60:40.
 
OCDEMS said:
On the concept of a combined match:

According to what I've read/heard, as AOA programs become accredited by the ACGME (if not provisionally accredited) they will automatically be removed from the AOA match and placed in the ACGME match. I could be wrong, but I think this was addressed during one of the town hall meetings immediately after the MOU was announced when the question was asked about a single match. Basically, the take away was that, as we approach 2020, more and more AOA programs will slowly begin to drop off the AOA match until there is essentially a "unified" match due to pure numbers alone. Only those programs that are struggling to attain accreditation will likely be under the AOA match come 2020. Further, I've heard that in some specialities there is already a rush to begin preparing for the 2015 application process. I wouldn't be surprised if you see nearly all of the very strong AOA programs begin the swap to the ACGME system by at least 2016.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, as I acknowledge that my understanding of the process may not be correct. The "advantage" of the above system is that each subsequent year of matching DO students will have to worry less and less about the two match process.
Click to expand...
This has not been officially confirmed yet. The NRMP is a separate entity from the ACGME and was not a party to the negotiations.
Therefore there is no official acknowledgment that AOA programs which switch to ACGME will automatically be moved to the NRMP during the transition period.

http://www.osteopathic.org/inside-aoa/Pages/faq-students-match.aspx

Dr. Zombie said:
Good point. I feel (in light of what a program director told me), many AOA programs will rush to gain ACGME accreditation, since they aren't naive to the fact that they will appear more attractive to DO applicants, since according to recent application history, the ratio of ACGME:AOA applicants has approached near 60:40.
Click to expand...
This is quite possibly due to the fact that there are simply more ACGME programs to apply to than there are AOA programs.
 
GUH said:
This has not been officially confirmed yet. The NRMP is a separate entity from the ACGME and was not a party to the negotiations.
Therefore there is no official acknowledgment that AOA programs which switch to ACGME will automatically be moved to the NRMP during the transition period.

http://www.osteopathic.org/inside-aoa/Pages/faq-students-match.aspx


This is quite possibly due to the fact that there are simply more ACGME programs to apply to than there are AOA programs.
Click to expand...

You sound as if you think most DO grads would prefer an AOA residency over an ACGME residency if only there enough spots.

I would hope that most students would be most interested in getting the best training, whether that be AOA or ACGME.
 
FWIW, I asked a DO PD about his program accepting MDs. Response was they would be accepting applications from MDs and choosing residents by board scores. I have no interest in applying there so there was no reason to ask if being an MD applicant was an advantage.
 
Fresh and straight from the source: http://thedo.osteopathic.org/2014/06/qa-straight-talk-with-aoa-leaders-about-new-single-gme-system/

Highlights:
"They [OPP prerequisites] aren’t finalized yet, but they will be substantial. We want to make sure that MD graduates entering osteopathically focused programs have a good understanding of both OPP and osteopathic manipulative treatment."
"ACGME accreditation of our programs will open more opportunities for expanded licensing for DOs in more countries around the world. Other countries are well aware of the ACGME and what it means for a physician to graduate from an ACGME program. When more people internationally are aware that our graduates are coming out of ACGME-accredited programs, we will be more successful in our ongoing quest for full scope of practice in other countries."
"We face the ongoing challenge in an outcomes-driven world to clearly measure the distinctiveness of OPP. In this unified system, which is going to be quite metrics-driven, we have a chance to provide better objective evidence of the advantages of osteopathic principles, and therefore further enhance our distinctiveness."
"We are already getting a significant number of inquiries from hospitals that would like to develop osteopathically focused programs in new locations and markets. We anticipate seeing many osteopathic programs develop during this transition period."
"We’re advocating on behalf of our osteopathic program directors and faculty. We also understand, though, that each residency review committee has the opportunity to make decisions about the program directors within each specialty. We’ll continue to monitor that as well."
"We recognize that, at the outset, we couldn’t get everything we wanted in this emerging relationship with the ACGME. Everyone should be aware that the ACGME also didn’t get everything they wanted in the new system."
"We’ve mapped out a process by which MDs prequalify to enter our training programs. Through that pathway, and once governing documents are revised, they can take our boards, and they can join the AOA and be welcomed members of our association. ... We envision significant numbers of MDs wanting to join the AOA, just like a number of DOs have chosen to join the AAP and the AMA."

They unfortunately make no comment on the joint match, licensing examinations, or Resolution 42-related matters. They mention no specifics of the concerns from the osteopathic specialty boards and organizations.


Edit: Also significant - "Collaborating centers conduct research in partnership with the WHO. The first step will be for one of our schools to work with the WHO on clinical research in osteopathic medicine. We met with Dr. Zhang Qi, the WHO’s coordinator of complementary and traditional medicine, to share research proposals from three of our schools and get the process started. Once we launch this initiative, it will create further awareness of osteopathic medicine internationally."
 
Last edited:
SnowDoggy44 said:
Fresh and straight from the source: http://thedo.osteopathic.org/2014/06/qa-straight-talk-with-aoa-leaders-about-new-single-gme-system/

Highlights:
"They [OPP prerequisites] aren’t finalized yet, but they will be substantial. We want to make sure that MD graduates entering osteopathically focused programs have a good understanding of both OPP and osteopathic manipulative treatment."
"ACGME accreditation of our programs will open more opportunities for expanded licensing for DOs in more countries around the world. Other countries are well aware of the ACGME and what it means for a physician to graduate from an ACGME program. When more people internationally are aware that our graduates are coming out of ACGME-accredited programs, we will be more successful in our ongoing quest for full scope of practice in other countries."
"We face the ongoing challenge in an outcomes-driven world to clearly measure the distinctiveness of OPP. In this unified system, which is going to be quite metrics-driven, we have a chance to provide better objective evidence of the advantages of osteopathic principles, and therefore further enhance our distinctiveness."
"We are already getting a significant number of inquiries from hospitals that would like to develop osteopathically focused programs in new locations and markets. We anticipate seeing many osteopathic programs develop during this transition period."
"We’re advocating on behalf of our osteopathic program directors and faculty. We also understand, though, that each residency review committee has the opportunity to make decisions about the program directors within each specialty. We’ll continue to monitor that as well."
"We recognize that, at the outset, we couldn’t get everything we wanted in this emerging relationship with the ACGME. Everyone should be aware that the ACGME also didn’t get everything they wanted in the new system."
"We’ve mapped out a process by which MDs prequalify to enter our training programs. Through that pathway, and once governing documents are revised, they can take our boards, and they can join the AOA and be welcomed members of our association. ... We envision significant numbers of MDs wanting to join the AOA, just like a number of DOs have chosen to join the AAP and the AMA."

They unfortunately make no comment on the joint match, licensing examinations, or Resolution 42-related matters. They mention no specifics of the concerns from the osteopathic specialty boards and organizations.
Click to expand...
They also make no mention of any measures or efforts to reduce discrimination against DOs at ACGME programs.
 
SnowDoggy44 said:
Fresh and straight from the source: http://thedo.osteopathic.org/2014/06/qa-straight-talk-with-aoa-leaders-about-new-single-gme-system/

Highlights:
"They [OPP prerequisites] aren’t finalized yet, but they will be substantial. We want to make sure that MD graduates entering osteopathically focused programs have a good understanding of both OPP and osteopathic manipulative treatment."
"ACGME accreditation of our programs will open more opportunities for expanded licensing for DOs in more countries around the world. Other countries are well aware of the ACGME and what it means for a physician to graduate from an ACGME program. When more people internationally are aware that our graduates are coming out of ACGME-accredited programs, we will be more successful in our ongoing quest for full scope of practice in other countries."
"We face the ongoing challenge in an outcomes-driven world to clearly measure the distinctiveness of OPP. In this unified system, which is going to be quite metrics-driven, we have a chance to provide better objective evidence of the advantages of osteopathic principles, and therefore further enhance our distinctiveness."
"We are already getting a significant number of inquiries from hospitals that would like to develop osteopathically focused programs in new locations and markets. We anticipate seeing many osteopathic programs develop during this transition period."
"We’re advocating on behalf of our osteopathic program directors and faculty. We also understand, though, that each residency review committee has the opportunity to make decisions about the program directors within each specialty. We’ll continue to monitor that as well."
"We recognize that, at the outset, we couldn’t get everything we wanted in this emerging relationship with the ACGME. Everyone should be aware that the ACGME also didn’t get everything they wanted in the new system."
"We’ve mapped out a process by which MDs prequalify to enter our training programs. Through that pathway, and once governing documents are revised, they can take our boards, and they can join the AOA and be welcomed members of our association. ... We envision significant numbers of MDs wanting to join the AOA, just like a number of DOs have chosen to join the AAP and the AMA."

They unfortunately make no comment on the joint match, licensing examinations, or Resolution 42-related matters. They mention no specifics of the concerns from the osteopathic specialty boards and organizations.
Click to expand...

All of it sounds great, but just based on the opinions from people on here on the AOA, this part made me chuckle a little bit..
"We envision significant numbers of MDs wanting to join the AOA, just like a number of DOs have chosen to join the AAP and the AMA"
 
GUH said:
They also make no mention of any measures or efforts to reduce discrimination against DOs at ACGME programs.
Click to expand...
Yeah, they don't provide any specific measures or concerns about discrimination, but rather suggest that with time positive interaction will lead to reasonable and enhanced cooperation and understanding:
"I have also practiced for the last 16 years in a largely allopathic environment at the Cleveland Clinic, where I work every day with allopathic colleagues. I’ve never felt concerned about sharing what I do as an osteopathic physician or being a mentor to MDs and DOs alike. A single GME system opens up the opportunity for us to continue to grow in this way."
However, Dr. Juhasz comes from a DO-friendly internal med background and not a sub-specialty.
 
SnowDoggy44 said:
Fresh and straight from the source: http://thedo.osteopathic.org/2014/06/qa-straight-talk-with-aoa-leaders-about-new-single-gme-system/

Highlights:
"They [OPP prerequisites] aren’t finalized yet, but they will be substantial. We want to make sure that MD graduates entering osteopathically focused programs have a good understanding of both OPP and osteopathic manipulative treatment."
"ACGME accreditation of our programs will open more opportunities for expanded licensing for DOs in more countries around the world. Other countries are well aware of the ACGME and what it means for a physician to graduate from an ACGME program. When more people internationally are aware that our graduates are coming out of ACGME-accredited programs, we will be more successful in our ongoing quest for full scope of practice in other countries."
"We face the ongoing challenge in an outcomes-driven world to clearly measure the distinctiveness of OPP. In this unified system, which is going to be quite metrics-driven, we have a chance to provide better objective evidence of the advantages of osteopathic principles, and therefore further enhance our distinctiveness."
"We are already getting a significant number of inquiries from hospitals that would like to develop osteopathically focused programs in new locations and markets. We anticipate seeing many osteopathic programs develop during this transition period."
"We’re advocating on behalf of our osteopathic program directors and faculty. We also understand, though, that each residency review committee has the opportunity to make decisions about the program directors within each specialty. We’ll continue to monitor that as well."
"We recognize that, at the outset, we couldn’t get everything we wanted in this emerging relationship with the ACGME. Everyone should be aware that the ACGME also didn’t get everything they wanted in the new system."
"We’ve mapped out a process by which MDs prequalify to enter our training programs. Through that pathway, and once governing documents are revised, they can take our boards, and they can join the AOA and be welcomed members of our association. ... We envision significant numbers of MDs wanting to join the AOA, just like a number of DOs have chosen to join the AAP and the AMA."

They unfortunately make no comment on the joint match, licensing examinations, or Resolution 42-related matters. They mention no specifics of the concerns from the osteopathic specialty boards and organizations.


Edit: Also significant - "Collaborating centers conduct research in partnership with the WHO. The first step will be for one of our schools to work with the WHO on clinical research in osteopathic medicine. We met with Dr. Zhang Qi, the WHO’s coordinator of complementary and traditional medicine, to share research proposals from three of our schools and get the process started. Once we launch this initiative, it will create further awareness of osteopathic medicine internationally."
Click to expand...

Seems like this was implying that if MDs wanna go AOA they have to take our boards. I'd imagine it's not too easy for someone who's never trained in OMM to study and pass that section on the COMLEX. Im sure it can be done but I don't foresee too many MDs clamoring to study and take the COMLEX just so they can try for some AOA spots
 
guylewis said:
Seems like this was implying that if MDs wanna go AOA they have to take our boards. I'd imagine it's not too easy for someone who's never trained in OMM to study and pass that section on the COMLEX. Im sure it can be done but I don't foresee too many MDs clamoring to study and take the COMLEX just so they can try for some AOA spots
Click to expand...

Do you really feel performing a spinal manipulation or understand a listing is substantially more difficult or complex than the amount of material passing Step 1, Step 2, or Step 3?
 
jakeislove said:
Do you really feel performing a spinal manipulation or understand a listing is substantially more difficult or complex than the amount of material passing Step 1, Step 2, or Step 3?
Click to expand...
Do you really feel that all you need to know to do well on the COMLEX is performing a spinal manipulation? Or that the test style is the exact same as the USMLE?

See I can respond to with rhetorical questions too
 
guylewis said:
Seems like this was implying that if MDs wanna go AOA they have to take our boards. I'd imagine it's not too easy for someone who's never trained in OMM to study and pass that section on the COMLEX. Im sure it can be done but I don't foresee too many MDs clamoring to study and take the COMLEX just so they can try for some AOA spots
Click to expand...
When it is said, "We’ve mapped out a process by which MDs prequalify to enter our training programs. Through that pathway, and once governing documents are revised, they can take our boards, and they can join the AOA and be welcomed members of our association", I took that as meaning specialty boards not the licensing exams (COMLEX). Perhaps I'm wrong though?
I took, "They [OPP prerequisites] aren’t finalized yet, but they will be substantial," as meaning something more than just a weekend course. But really, we only know that substantial means a 'good understanding of OPP and OMT' and even that leaves a lot of possibilities open.
 
guylewis said:
Do you really feel that all you need to know to do well on the COMLEX is performing a spinal manipulation? Or that the test style is the exact same as the USMLE?

See I can respond to with rhetorical questions too
Click to expand...

It's a sincere question. Not one of the DO students, residents, or Attendings I've rotated with performed any manipulation. To what extent the material is similar to what we're required to know for the USMLEs or how relevant OMM is to typical clinical practice?

I figured someone here that has taken both would know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mr.Smile12
Call for nominations 2025 Advisor of the Year
Replies
1
Views
671
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
2
Ophthalmology After The Merger
Replies
2
Views
1K
qwerty89
Q
L
How has NSU KPCOM changed in the eyes of the community?
Replies
1
Views
2K
Goro
Goro
M
Letter of Support before M1
Replies
2
Views
745
pigsinacloth
pigsinacloth
B
What are the advantages to matching at programs like Duke, UNC, UPenn etc for FM residency?
Replies
5
Views
2K
Banana_pudding
B
Top