Anybody else think OMM has some use?

[Neopolymath]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

But why not just have doctors who know a little PT? Like what are you so bitter about? If anything you can bill for it and make even more money ( not the reason why you should do it but it's even prgamatic in that way).


Yes to all of this! Makes me proud to be a DO student. Yes, some of OMM is fluff, but the neck/back pain and headache stuff is real!
I had chronic tension headaches as a teen ( pretty much still do, but they are more managable). They were so bad when I was 16 that I literally thought they would ruin my life...sometimes I think about what a little OMM may have done. ( I actually mentioned this HA thing in one of my secondaries lol).

I'm not bitter about anything. The bottom line is almost no one uses it and yet everyone is forced to spend hundreds of hours on it. That doesn't make any sense. It should be an elective. Essentially all other education works that way in other fields.

 

[Neopolymath]

Ponder this: We spend HUNDREDS of hours more on OMM than we do on radiology and anesthesia. Idk your past experience before school but I can tell you that most attending physicians, not just med students, would benefit greatly from understanding the basic principles of those fields. I love my surgery bros (high five) but they generally have no clue about anesthesia. I also encourage anyone who doesn't believe me to spend a weekend reading Felson's Chest and a couple days in the reading room hearing the phone ring constantly before going back out to their clerkships where their attendings think they can order correct imaging and "read" imaging because they saw a gigantic pneumo on a radiograph in the ER once. It becomes obvious a lot of them can't read a CXR when you read that simple book.

As I said, I argue from the position that time is a finite resource which is an incontrovertible truth.

 

[Lawpy]

Ponder this: We spend HUNDREDS of hours more on OMM than we do on radiology and anesthesia. Idk your past experience before school but I can tell you that most attending physicians, not just med students, would benefit greatly from understanding the basic principles of those fields. I love my surgery bros (high five) but they generally have no clue about anesthesia. I also encourage anyone who doesn't believe me to spend a weekend reading Felson's Chest and a couple days in the reading room hearing the phone ring constantly before going back out to their clerkships where their attendings think they can order correct imaging and "read" imaging because they saw a gigantic pneumo on a radiograph in the ER once. It becomes obvious a lot of them can't read a CXR when you read that simple book.

As I said, I argue from the position that time is a finite resource which is an incontrovertible truth.

Yeah i blame that entirely on True Believers and OMM fanatics. I'll be enraged if i lose the opportunity to learn rads/gas in favor of OMM, most of which consists of pseudoscience crap

 

[drducky.]

Ponder this: We spend HUNDREDS of hours more on OMM than we do on radiology and anesthesia. Idk your past experience before school but I can tell you that most attending physicians, not just med students, would benefit greatly from understanding the basic principles of those fields. I love my surgery bros (high five) but they generally have no clue about anesthesia. I also encourage anyone who doesn't believe me to spend a weekend reading Felson's Chest and a couple days in the reading room hearing the phone ring constantly before going back out to their clerkships where their attendings think they can order correct imaging and "read" imaging because they saw a gigantic pneumo on a radiograph in the ER once. It becomes obvious a lot of them can't read a CXR when you read that simple book.

As I said, I argue from the position that time is a finite resource which is an incontrovertible truth.

I can think of a million different things to make me a better clinician than omm but it is what it is.

 

[Konigstiger]

It's a matter of opportunity cost. I don't have a problem with OMM in general, but when DOs are already at such a huge disadvantage in the match, the time spent on learning OMM should really be used for other things like research or boards prep. While we are busy trying to palpate Chapman's Points, MD students are strengthening their applications. It's completely backwards.

I'm not one of those people who is violently against OMM and thinks it's all nonsense, but as others have said, it needs to be an elective. To have it as a mandatory part of your education is ridiculous.

 

[BorntobeDO?]

It’s main use is apparently to lower my dang board scores. So glad to be done with it.

 

[FUallthetimeRollDins]

Hi everyone,

First year DO student here. Learning OMM in the pandemic setup has been challenging, but overall, I like OMM. I think it is useful for MSK pain ( for example, neck pain). The cranial stuff is BS, but some of it actually is useful for neck/back pain.

Am I the only one here? Like, yes , okay, I didn't get into an MD school, but I also don't hate OMM. It really does help my neck pain, for example.

Is this just me? I feel like we hate on OMM a little too much on here.

OMS-II here.

As you continue learning techniques, you'll continue to be surprised. Yes, some of the stuff is BS for most people - however, for others it is absolute gold. Example: I think counterstrain is pretty solid as a theory but I've never been able to make it work on anyone I treat. However, one of my classmates had chronic sacrum pain and got a CS point treated and hasn't hurt since. Some of the stuff is absolutely gold, but some of it is a bit esoteric (and dare I say, historical?). Talk to your faculty about it. Any OMM guru who has practiced will tell you that the 20/80 rule applies to OMM too - you use 20% of the techniques you know to treat 80% of the problems you see. Keep up the faith, you might be surprised!

Some of my favorite techniques include colonic stimulation (as our faculty called it, "massaging the poop"), cervical HVLA, sacral rock (do this on a girl with menstrual pain and you've got yourself a new fan), and the technique for hiccups (medical term = singultus...which is just a great party fact lol).

good luck!

 

[JudgeIsInTheHouse]

Hate to be like this but correctly-done and effective OMM has been a rather big hit with the ladies I've messed around with. 😎

 

[vfern027]

After finishing my OMM rotation, it'd be hard to argue against the improvement that some of the patients feel after an appointment of ME, BLT, counterstrain, and different articulatory techniques. I don't know how much of it is placebo or just time that the body needed to heal, but nearly all the patients who came in loved it and even were willing to pay out of pocket if their insurance company didn't cover OMM. I don't even think my preceptors believed in cranial or chapman's points though, which was a relief to me.

I’m learning CRI right now and I’m crying on the inside lol. Aside from that every other technique I’ve learned so far has done wonders for my headaches, back pain and not just for me but for my husband!

 

[Prionos]

I’m sick of hearing anecdotes about individual patients feeling better after being treated with OMM. Talk to the long-time clients of any homeopath, reflexologist, faith healer, etc., and you’ll hear the same exact things. If I’m going to consider the possibility that the effects of OMM treatment surpass the effects that stem from the placebo effect and the body’s natural recovery progress, I want to see large-scale, rigorous studies in reputable journals.

One might respond, “Sure, our only empirical evidence comes from small, horribly designed studies from the Journal of Osteopathic Medicine, a propaganda arm of the AOA—but we understand how OMM works in theory!” No. The mechanisms that are proposed to explain osteopathic theories and principles virtually all stem from reckless misapplications of science. Like many forms of quackery, osteopathy surrounds itself with a thin veil of technical, fancy-sounding terms and concepts in order to seem credible. It’s all just a facade, meant to cover up what is really an outdated, irrelevant brand of pseudoscience.

Osteopathy doesn’t make sense in theory, and there’s still no strong evidence that it works in practice. It would never even cross my mind to refer a patient to a physician who regularly performs OMM treatments. Scam artists and delusional mystics have no place in the medical profession.

Aside from cranial it absolutely makes sense. You need to study msk neuro reflexes.

 

[jesspt]

Stuff like muscle energy is not a placebo, many of the techniques are just a fancy name of some PT or rehab techniques. I think muscle energy is just a fancy name for PNF exercise. Other things like slapping or cupping are used routinely by message tech. PTs also learn these techniques and use them in on daily basis. Many of these techniques won't do anything chronically but it is good for an acute release this is why patients like it. just like people visit PT frequently

Stuff like muscle energy is not a placebo

Not a whole lot of data that suggests it is anything but.

 

[never-too-late]

I think it has a value, I have benefitted from it before being a student. The thing I resent about it is the extra class/exams/mental space I devote to it while studying for the things that have more clinical importance. I would be all for an elective that would enable me to use it in practice. I think they have these courses for MDs who want to learn it. But this is the DO tax and I'm willing to pay it to become a physician

 

[olddoc1842]

As an older person I can tell you that OMM has saved me after some running injuries and other issues. There are people who are very gifted and talented at it. The vast majority of DO's will never use it but don't discount its usefulness. It does not replace your medical treatment but it can be a wonderful adjunct

 

[culturekweenXx]

I'm still hoping to see a defense of OMM curriculum that isn't built on personal anecdotes. OMM diagnosis has very poor inter-observer reliability and no way to objectively confirm (I wonder where all the studies are that use radiology to confirm somatic dysfunctions). OMM treatments rely on some semblance of theoretical plausibility (without proof) and n=1 self-reported improvements.

 

[Doc_Ock]

 

[JDWannabe]

Hi everyone,

First year DO student here. Learning OMM in the pandemic setup has been challenging, but overall, I like OMM. I think it is useful for MSK pain ( for example, neck pain). The cranial stuff is BS, but some of it actually is useful for neck/back pain.

Am I the only one here? Like, yes , okay, I didn't get into an MD school, but I also don't hate OMM. It really does help my neck pain, for example.

Is this just me? I feel like we hate on OMM a little too much on here.

I would say you are definitely missing out on a big part of what it is to perform OMT and the development of your palpation skills as well. Coming from someone who has used cranial quite a bit, I can at least say (from an n=1) that I've made significant positive improvement with my OB/GYN and FM patients with migraines, involuntary eye twitching, and relieving sinus and ear congestion through OCMM. Learning how to tune in to your senses and maximize those skills with your hands is not an easy process and a lot of those that I've talked to that were doubting the utility of OMT usually change their minds after myself or one of my well-skilled colleagues treats them.

 

[Osminog]

I would say you are definitely missing out on a big part of what it is to perform OMT and the development of your palpation skills as well. Coming from someone who has used cranial quite a bit, I can at least say (from an n=1) that I've made significant positive improvement with my OB/GYN and FM patients with migraines, involuntary eye twitching, and relieving sinus and ear congestion through OCMM. Learning how to tune in to your senses and maximize those skills with your hands is not an easy process and a lot of those that I've talked to that were doubting the utility of OMT usually change their minds after myself or one of my well-skilled colleagues treats them.

Maybe they just told you they feel better so that you'd leave them alone and stop performing magic rituals on their heads.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

I would say you are definitely missing out on a big part of what it is to perform OMT and the development of your palpation skills as well. Coming from someone who has used cranial quite a bit, I can at least say (from an n=1) that I've made significant positive improvement with my OB/GYN and FM patients with migraines, involuntary eye twitching, and relieving sinus and ear congestion through OCMM. Learning how to tune in to your senses and maximize those skills with your hands is not an easy process and a lot of those that I've talked to that were doubting the utility of OMT usually change their minds after myself or one of my well-skilled colleagues treats them.

Excellent. You should have no issues proving it’s validity then.

 

[beltranr]

Hi everyone,

First year DO student here. Learning OMM in the pandemic setup has been challenging, but overall, I like OMM. I think it is useful for MSK pain ( for example, neck pain). The cranial stuff is BS, but some of it actually is useful for neck/back pain.

Am I the only one here? Like, yes , okay, I didn't get into an MD school, but I also don't hate OMM. It really does help my neck pain, for example.

Is this just me? I feel like we hate on OMM a little too much on here.

Hey! I'm not in med school yet, but OMM is the reason I am applying DO instead of MD. I think traditional biomedicine does really hate on anything that is at all "alternative" and OMM does resemble chiropractic practices in a way that makes more traditional folks hesitant. The division between DO and MD has a really interesting and emotionally charged history, I am sure you know more than me considering you are already in med school, but if you have time (I know i know) and are interested, Ehrenreich, Barbara., and English, Deirdre. Witches, Midwives & Nurses A History of Women Healers has some really good information about the rise of the medical industry as we know it today and the intentional exclusion of women, POC, and the public. I think this gives some important context on why DO and OMM are regarded as a little off the beaten track compared to MD.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

why DO and OMM are regarded as a little off the beaten track compared to MD.

They are off the beaten track because in over 100 years there hasn’t been any actual research done to show its validity.

 

[Chicken Bone]

try google scholar or pubmed PNF exercises or stretching PNF and muscle energy have identical techniques, it is just ME has a fancy name in the DO world

 

[CluvK]

I had used Sacral Rocking for my girlfriend's dysmenorrhea.

She reported a 0% improvement. I was glad she didn't report a -75% improvement.

 

[deleted898021]

I’m sick of hearing anecdotes about individual patients feeling better after being treated with OMM. Talk to the long-time clients of any homeopath, reflexologist, faith healer, etc., and you’ll hear the same exact things. If I’m going to consider the possibility that the effects of OMM treatment surpass the effects that stem from the placebo effect and the body’s natural recovery progress, I want to see large-scale, rigorous studies in reputable journals.

One might respond, “Sure, our only empirical evidence comes from small, horribly designed studies from the Journal of Osteopathic Medicine, a propaganda arm of the AOA—but we understand how OMM works in theory!” No. The mechanisms that are proposed to explain osteopathic theories and principles virtually all stem from reckless misapplications of science. Like many forms of quackery, osteopathy surrounds itself with a thin veil of technical, fancy-sounding terms and concepts in order to seem credible. It’s all just a facade, meant to cover up what is really an outdated, irrelevant brand of pseudoscience.

Osteopathy doesn’t make sense in theory, and there’s still no strong evidence that it works in practice. It would never even cross my mind to refer a patient to a physician who regularly performs OMM treatments. Scam artists and delusional mystics have no place in the medical profession.

You need to chill dude. You realize that much of OPP minus the quackery stuff(cranial and champmans’a point) is no different then PT? For msk stuff OPP has the same impact that PT has on patients and I am sure you would refer a patient to a PT wouldn’t you? Yes the outdated stuff needs to go and is quackery but you can’t call all omm treatments scam at the same time and oh btw I absolutely hate opp and have no interest in practicing it in the future, but most of it does no harm to patients and helps them similarly to PT...

 

[Chicken Bone]

You need to chill dude. You realize that much of OPP minus the quackery stuff(cranial and champmans’a point) is no different then PT? For msk stuff OPP has the same impact that PT has on patients and I am sure you would refer a patient to a PT wouldn’t you? Yes the outdated stuff needs to go and is quackery but you can’t call all omm treatments scam at the same time and oh btw I absolutely hate opp and have no interest in practicing it in the future, but most of it does no harm to patients and helps them similarly to PT...

reading this thread I think a lot of people mean the effectiveness of these OMMs in treating somatic dysfunction or other stuff claimed by the OMM framework is bs. While the technique is essential as identical as many PT stuff, they have different aims. There is no somatic dysfunction or osteopathic structure issues in PT

 

[Greenerguns]

As an applicant, I have some thoughts. There are a lot of people in this thread jumping down the throats of anyone advocating OMM, and I absolutely get it. It has yet to cleanly separate itself from pseudoscience and outdated traditions.
I want to learn OMM because I think that even if it only helps a few patients, it’s just something else to have in my tool belt and this is the only way for me to do it. I can’t go to med school and PT school, but I can go to DO school. I want to learn as much as possible to have the largest pool of techniques to draw on in my practice and OMM is part of that.
Also, the DOs I know have found it’s generally helpful by just being more adept at palpating and using their hands. Again, as far as I’m concerned, that’s a bonus.
Yes it’s a time sink and yes it’s couched among a lot of BS, but for someone like me who has personally seen the benefit of manipulative techniques and wants to be able to pass that on to patients myself (instead of referring them out) then why not learn it? The frustration that patients feel because they have to get turfed out for everything is real. If I can manipulate their neck and give them some relief from their tension headache AND manage their medications at the same time, then I’m making a patient’s life a little easier. I obviously am not in it yet, but I wanted to add my perspective as someone who is interested in OMM.
In short: I see it as a way to maximize my potential as a physician. Does that mean it will be a critical part of my practice? No, I might never use it. But I’d rather learn it and decide for myself.

 

[Doc_Ock]

As an applicant, I have some thoughts. There are a lot of people in this thread jumping down the throats of anyone advocating OMM, and I absolutely get it. It has yet to cleanly separate itself from pseudoscience and outdated traditions.
I want to learn OMM because I think that even if it only helps a few patients, it’s just something else to have in my tool belt and this is the only way for me to do it. I can’t go to med school and PT school, but I can go to DO school. I want to learn as much as possible to have the largest pool of techniques to draw on in my practice and OMM is part of that.
Also, the DOs I know have found it’s generally helpful by just being more adept at palpating and using their hands. Again, as far as I’m concerned, that’s a bonus.
Yes it’s a time sink and yes it’s couched among a lot of BS, but for someone like me who has personally seen the benefit of manipulative techniques and wants to be able to pass that on to patients myself (instead of referring them out) then why not learn it? The frustration that patients feel because they have to get turfed out for everything is real. If I can manipulate their neck and give them some relief from their tension headache AND manage their medications at the same time, then I’m making a patient’s life a little easier. I obviously am not in it yet, but I wanted to add my perspective as someone who is interested in OMM.
In short: I see it as a way to maximize my potential as a physician. Does that mean it will be a critical part of my practice? No, I might never use it. But I’d rather learn it and decide for myself.

Simple answer- because the time you spend learning OMT (which can be A LOT depending on what school you do to)- is time that could be spent learning real medicine.

 

[Lawpy]

As an applicant, I have some thoughts. There are a lot of people in this thread jumping down the throats of anyone advocating OMM, and I absolutely get it. It has yet to cleanly separate itself from pseudoscience and outdated traditions.
I want to learn OMM because I think that even if it only helps a few patients, it’s just something else to have in my tool belt and this is the only way for me to do it. I can’t go to med school and PT school, but I can go to DO school. I want to learn as much as possible to have the largest pool of techniques to draw on in my practice and OMM is part of that.
Also, the DOs I know have found it’s generally helpful by just being more adept at palpating and using their hands. Again, as far as I’m concerned, that’s a bonus.
Yes it’s a time sink and yes it’s couched among a lot of BS, but for someone like me who has personally seen the benefit of manipulative techniques and wants to be able to pass that on to patients myself (instead of referring them out) then why not learn it? The frustration that patients feel because they have to get turfed out for everything is real. If I can manipulate their neck and give them some relief from their tension headache AND manage their medications at the same time, then I’m making a patient’s life a little easier. I obviously am not in it yet, but I wanted to add my perspective as someone who is interested in OMM.
In short: I see it as a way to maximize my potential as a physician. Does that mean it will be a critical part of my practice? No, I might never use it. But I’d rather learn it and decide for myself.

Why waste so much time learning mostly pseudoscience crap when you can use it to learn medicine and experience underappreciated specialties? Make OMM an elective and be done with it.

I rail against the useless crap added in a bloated 2 year preclinical curriculum (which should be reduced to 1/1.5 year everywhere) for MD schools. OMM is wasteful administrative crap that makes DO preclinical curriculum unnecessarily worse.

Stick to MSK benefits of OMM and that's it. Learning pseudoscience crap like cranial is a disgrace to the profession.

 

[recycledpaper]

As a radiology resident, I can confidently say that OMM is useless in my specialty.

 

[Neopolymath]

Need a pathology resident to respond now.

Then we can ask both of them if they ever saw any evidence of somatic dysfunction or chapman's points on imaging or histology.

Checkmate true believers and student true believers.

 

[deleted645092]

I saw a lot of patients that had formerly been on high dose opioids but now were managed with only OMM. OMM dramatically improved and in some cases even saved the lives of these chronic pain patients

💯. I did OMM for a year straight and I was honestly amazed at the musculoskeletal benefits. I had patients who stopped their chronic pain meds and one who owned a local business that was finally able to go back to work because she had scoliosis but couldn’t function before OMM.

I memorized cranial, viscerosomatics, and Chapman’s points for boards and left it at that.

The biggest problem with OMM is that after doing it for so long I realized it really is almost impossible to perform a rigorous study. Everyone responds differently to different techniques and it’s extremely operator dependent. You could have me as the sole provider for a study on lower back pain and it would probably show pretty good results. But have me do mid back or neck pain and not at all. But in reality the musculoskeletal techniques are evidence based, just under different names and different fields. If they weren’t nobody would be promoting “leave it to the PT/OT/ massage therapists”. At my school it’s all taught through the biotensegrity model

In the end you just have to take what you can from it, and demonstrate enough critical thinking skills to recognize what’s BS.

Disclaimer: I am not going into NMM, not even primary care. But my #1 does have a free clinic that I may volunteer at.

 

[woolsocks90]

It's entertaining to read some of the responses on this thread regarding OMM.

Nobody is arguing that there are aspects of OMM that can be beneficial to patients, but the cult-like following of cranial, chapman points, and some of the strain "theories" is down right embarrassing for the rest of osteopaths. Unless you are DPC, private practice, or running a strict OMM-only practice I highly doubt anyone has the time to treat their patients with OMM sufficiently. Gone are the days of primary care when one could sit with patients for 45 minutes and address all of their medical and MSK issues. One of my biggest gripes with the DO model is that they pride themselves on producing primary care physicians but so much time is spent on learning BS like cranial that it takes away from students mastering techniques that they could actually use in practice.

I spent time working in an OMM clinic during medical school and I was frightened by the amount of basic MSK issues providers misdiagnosed or missed completely. While I do not want to knock anyone pursuing an NMM residency/fellowship, there is a significant lack of MSK knowledge with many NMM providers. Just because a person knows the name of a bone or muscle doesn't mean they know how to treat it properly.

OMM has it's place in medicine/MSK management, but to take anecdotal "evidence?" and make it a core foundation in medical education is hindering the future of students and the profession. It's time for DOs to evolve with medicine instead of teaching the works of AT Still as if he published in NEJM.

 

[Lanhaines Elsetion]

You all applied to DO school knowing that you would have to learn X amount of hours of OMM. Its interesting to see how heated some of you are about being "forced" to learn it.

 

[Neopolymath]

You all applied to DO school knowing that you would have to learn X amount of hours of OMM. Its interesting to see how heated some of you are about being "forced" to learn it.

Nothing is allowed to be improved or streamlined EVER!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Lanhaines Elsetion]

Nothing is allowed to be improved or streamlined EVER!!!!!!!!!!!

Lol I'm not saying that. But there is quite a bit of self-hate in this thread in some of the comments, and of course throughout SDN in general. That attitude isn't productive IMO.

 

[Neopolymath]

Lol I'm not saying that. But there is quite a bit of self-hate in this thread in some of the comments, and of course throughout SDN in general. That attitude isn't productive IMO.

Sure you are and another unproductive attitude is accepting outdated BS incongruent with the needs of modern medical students and physicians.

 

[Lanhaines Elsetion]

Sure you are and another unproductive attitude is accepting outdated BS incongruent with the needs of modern medical students and physicians.

I don't agree with everything I learn in medical school, whether it be OMM or another "modern" subject. Maybe you should consider how up to date 50% of what we learn is. Its unproductive to be self-hating as it gives the profession as a whole a worse reputation. Where do you think the DO bias starts? The same bias that makes it more difficult to match into competitive specialties.

 

[Lawpy]

Just make OMM an MSK only elective (and get rid of True Believer/cranial crap) everywhere and merge the degree into MD

 

[Neopolymath]

I don't agree with everything I learn in medical school, whether it be OMM or another "modern" subject. Maybe you should consider how up to date 50% of what we learn is. Its unproductive to be self-hating as it gives the profession as a whole a worse reputation. Where do you think the DO bias starts? The same bias that makes it more difficult to match into competitive specialties.

Ah so the argument has changed from "you go to school so suck it up and don't request improvement" to "other things are also not great so that validates OMM being 400 hours of wasted time."

We are talking about the merit of learning OMM in school not about DO reputation and so-called self-loathing DOs.

Edit: Wait this is even worse. Now your argument is that being irritated about a part of DO education is contributing to a lesser reputation of DOs in the medical communities. I hate to break it to you but a bigger bang for the buck fix to your perceived reputation issue would be to remove pseudoscience bull**** from the curriculum. Wow it's pretty crazy! I just got rid of a legit complaint among many students with supporting reasoning for their disdain AND helped their reputation in the overall community. But no we can do it your way by telling them to shut up. They have no reason to complain and their complaining is hurting DO reputation so they should suck it up.

This is classic healthcare politics on display. Instead of fixing the problem in a department, for example, we just tell other people to adjust something else because it's easier.

 

[deleted1066449]

Just make OMM an MSK only elective (and get rid of True Believer/cranial crap) everywhere and merge the degree into MD

Why not just apply for LCME accreditation so they can grant you an MD degree all together. I beilve UCI SOM started out as DO and went MD. Perhaps there is more to it than just OMM and money?

 

[Lawpy]

Why not just apply for LCME accreditation so they can grant you an MD degree all together. I beilve UCI SOM started out as DO and went MD. Perhaps there is more to it than just OMM and money?

Yes because many DO schools would shut down as COCA has poor quality standards

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

Why not just apply for LCME accreditation so they can grant you an MD degree all together. I beilve UCI SOM started out as DO and went MD. Perhaps there is more to it than just OMM and money?

The pandemic was pretty revealing in that it’s fairly clear it’s about money and OMM at this point.

 

[Neopolymath]

The pandemic was pretty revealing in that it’s fairly clear it’s about money and OMM at this point.

Which for the DO cabal is one in the same since their money depends on OMM to keep their redundant jobs.

 

[hallowmann]

Yes because many DO schools would shut down as COCA has poor quality standards

This is very overblown. There are not many requirements schools wouldn't be able to meet within a couple years transition. COCA and LCME requirements are actually pretty similar in most respects. But the thing is, it'll cost the schools money, it'll be harder to open new schools, and many of those heads of the schools (and COCA and AOA) are true believers in the "distinct" DO profession.

 

[Lawpy]

This is very overblown. There are not many requirements schools wouldn't be able to meet within a couple years transition. COCA and LCME requirements are actually pretty similar in most respects. But the thing is, it'll cost the schools money, it'll be harder to open new schools, and many of those heads of the schools (and COCA and AOA) are true believers in the "distinct" DO profession.

I discussed a lot about this topic with many SDNers and their opinions were that LCME standards are in fact a lot stricter than COCA's (an example being LCME having research requirements for accreditation iirc), which a lot of new DO schools can't accommodate. There's also the problem of clinical sites. An immediate adoption of LCME everywhere will likely be too harsh for a lot of DO schools to accommodate and thus will likely be forced to close down.

I think the residency merger is the first step to the eventual complete merger. But that said, i think OMM is here to stay and should be an elective everywhere and not a DO only thing.

 

[Lawpy]

If all existing schools can meet the LCME standards in a given transition period, it'd show the full merger will happen a lot sooner than i expected which is good news.

But i'm defending the continued existence of OMM for MSK benefits

 

[hallowmann]

I discussed a lot about this topic with many SDNers and their opinions were that LCME standards are in fact a lot stricter than COCA's (an example being LCME having research requirements for accreditation iirc), which a lot of new DO schools can't accommodate. There's also the problem of clinical sites. An immediate adoption of LCME everywhere will likely be too harsh for a lot of DO schools to accommodate and thus will likely be forced to close down.

I think the residency merger is the first step to the eventual complete merger. But that said, i think OMM is here to stay and should be an elective everywhere and not a DO only thing.

A few points here:
1. Research requirements can easily be accommodated by affiliating with a GME program (which most schools already do) and doing clinical research. Hell even hiring a few people on faculty that do individual clinical research could accomplish this. To give you an idea of how simple this could be, many board certifications already require QI-like projects, so docs all over are already doing research, all you'd really have to do is create an IRB from your current faculty and have them publish that work.

2. Clinical requirements for both LCME and COCA are completely equal. Look at the standards.

3. The merger didn't happen overnight. The thing took 5 years. No "immediate adoption of LCME" requirements would ever happen. Obviously places wouldn't meet requirements tomorrow. Even the best AOA programs didn't meet ACGME requirement the day after the MOU. There would be a transition. The vast majority of the schools would pass. It'll cost them money, but they're already making money hand over fist.

Like I said, it'll cost some money and it'll be some work, just like the residency merger was, but the actual requirements aren't all that different. DO schools would never do it though. Not in the near future. Why spend money when you don't have to? There's also zero incentive to do this from their perspective, whereas the residency merger had some very real dangers if it didn't happen.

 

[Lawpy]

A few points here:
1. Research requirements can easily be accommodated by affiliating with a GME program (which most schools already do) and doing clinical research. Hell even hiring a few people on faculty that do individual clinical research could accomplish this. To give you an idea of how simple this could be, many board certifications already require QI-like projects, so docs all over are already doing research, all you'd really have to do is create an IRB from your current faculty and have them publish that work.

2. Clinical requirements for both LCME and COCA are completely equal. Look at the standards.

3. The merger didn't happen overnight. The thing took 5 years. No "immediate adoption of LCME" requirements would ever happen. Obviously places wouldn't meet requirements tomorrow. Even the best AOA programs didn't meet ACGME requirement the day after the MOU. There would be a transition. The vast majority of the schools would pass. It'll cost them money, but they're already making money hand over fist.

Like I said, it'll cost some money and it'll be some work, just like the residency merger was, but the actual requirements aren't all that different. DO schools would never do it though. Not in the near future. Why spend money when you don't have to? There's also zero incentive to do this from their perspective, whereas the residency merger had some very real dangers if it didn't happen.

Well, this is surprisingly reassuring but i admit i need to read more on the standards. I want to clarify one point though:

Can the new schools and new regional campuses arising from the expansion meet LCME standards when given a transition period (like at least 5 years)?

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

Well, this is surprisingly reassuring but i admit i need to read more on the standards. I want to clarify one point though:

Can the new schools and new regional campuses arising from the expansion meet LCME standards when given a transition period (like at least 5 years)?

Yeah the clinical requirements are literally word for word. LCME reqs aren't actually as strict as you would think, most MD schools just surpass them by quite a bit and most DO schools just do the bare minimum.

 

[Lanhaines Elsetion]

Ah so the argument has changed from "you go to school so suck it up and don't request improvement" to "other things are also not great so that validates OMM being 400 hours of wasted time."

We are talking about the merit of learning OMM in school not about DO reputation and so-called self-loathing DOs.

Edit: Wait this is even worse. Now your argument is that being irritated about a part of DO education is contributing to a lesser reputation of DOs in the medical communities. I hate to break it to you but a bigger bang for the buck fix to your perceived reputation issue would be to remove pseudoscience bull**** from the curriculum. Wow it's pretty crazy! I just got rid of a legit complaint among many students with supporting reasoning for their disdain AND helped their reputation in the overall community. But no we can do it your way by telling them to shut up. They have no reason to complain and their complaining is hurting DO reputation so they should suck it up.

This is classic healthcare politics on display. Instead of fixing the problem in a department, for example, we just tell other people to adjust something else because it's easier.

You sure like to spin things into your own words, which defeats any point in further responses to you. Like you, I'd also prefer less time spent on OMM during med school, maybe it could become a single course like micro? Who knows? I'm sure you truly know deep down that every aspect of OMM is not pseudoscience, at least if you understand the physiological mechanisms behind it. I encourage you to seek out a practicing NMM physician and see what OMT is like in full length sessions. Its sad to see this self-loathing attitude ferment in this thread rather than giving a first year student some perspective on OMM as they originally requested.

And to my previous comment about owning up to what you signed up for, you in fact signed up for your 3-400 hours of OMM and your argument cannot change that, I'm sorry.

 

[Neopolymath]

You sure like to spin things into your own words, which defeats any point in further responses to you. Like you, I'd also prefer less time spent on OMM during med school, maybe it could become a single course like micro? Who knows? I'm sure you truly know deep down that every aspect of OMM is not pseudoscience, at least if you understand the physiological mechanisms behind it. I encourage you to seek out a practicing NMM physician and see what OMT is like in full length sessions. Its sad to see this self-loathing attitude ferment in this thread rather than giving a first year student some perspective on OMM as they originally requested.

And to my previous comment about owning up to what you signed up for, you in fact signed up for your 3-400 hours of OMM and your argument cannot change that, I'm sorry.

I'm just taking your poor rationale to it's logical conclusion. I didn't need to spin anything. It's not very hard when you reference the rest of the thread but don't contest any actual points brought up by it. I've made many balanced posts over the years about OMM. I truly don't think you know what self-hating or self-loathing even means. It's just a fun word thrown around by DO sdn counterculture when they can't address any of the various legitimate points brought in criticism of DO school. It happens all the time. Next year we will get the same thread as well.

I make it a point to improve processes and organizations for the next person on deck and not actively ignore inefficiencies and weaknesses. If you want to take the role of a person who sees trash on the floor and leaves it for the EVS folks be my guest. I guess that's your perogative.