theraball said:
I do agree that osteopathic schools seem to be behind when it comes to research. It's all very well to train GPs and FPs but to be a full featured medical school they really ought to have some research projects going on. This will enrich the student body by attracting a few DO/PhD nerds in addition to the regular bonesaws, they can compete for federal research grants, and they'll help raise osteopathy in the estimation of the mainstream medical community.
just my opinions 😉
I agree with you, especially with the research statement.
Osteopathic medical schools need to ramp up their research, this includes basic sciences and clinical research. It is imperative that they embrace the standards of medical education and academics. I'm not saying that they should abandon previous tenets and philosophies, because they have obviously served the profession well. However, medicine is changing and osteopathic physicians and the community need to grow along with the evolution of medical care. This means placing prior tenets under continual scrutiny, putting OMT to the test with basic science research, devising clinical trials that will effectively and rigorously examine the efficacy of OMT. Yes, I'm harping a bit on OMT, but this is a distinguishing face of Osteopathic medicine. Since we embrace it as such, we should hold it to the same standards as all other modalities of treatment.
New schools seeking AOA COCA approval and accreditation should be encouraged (perhaps required with a COCA change?) to seek a research university (public or private) where that affiliation will foster an increase in clinical and research and education opportunities. Succeeding in these areas are the key to the best medicine and furthering the goal of medicine, whether allopathic or osteopathic. This should be in addition to drawing clinical adjunct faculty in clinics and offices in the area and throughout the state. Proof of graduate medical programs in a number of diverse specialties should be presented to the council and this should be checked on a regular basis.
Regarding underserved areas, the osteopathic medical community has always faced the challenge of this population with open arms and wide smiles. We should continue to press for increases in the number of physicians that serve this needed but poorly esteemed area of medical care. Opening schools in areas where medical care and education is lacking has shown to help the situation. Likewise, there have been articles (including a great one in the March 1 issue of JAMA) that show that federally and privately funded organization such as the NHSC make a large difference in these areas. Federal funding for these programs should be increased with greater lobbying by the AMA/AOA, AAFP/ACOFP, ACP/ACOI, and other professional organizations. Further development should target areas like Idaho/Wyoming/Montana areas and Alaska and Appalachia. Perhaps, and I'm just putting this out there, a new medical college accredited by the AOA could be affiliated with another medical school in the area. Since I'm using Washington state as my prime example, UWash, this could expand the reach and service of the WWAMI program while placing a medical campus in that area.
Medicine in the hospital is a cooperative endeavor working for the good of the community at large. It is an investment by society in the future and in their own welfare. The establishment of academic medical centers should mirror this need and concern. The regulatory bodies of the AOA and the ACGME/LCME/ACCME should further focus on the establishment of campuses that increase research, provide academic centers for education of undergraduate and graduate professionals, while training future physicians and serving the community and populations at need.
