DO philosophy but in practice no difference?

[herewego]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Forgive my ignorance in the matter, I'm trying to do some research on the DO philosophy, and my question is pretty specific.

From what I gather, DO education is mostly the same as an MD education, aside from OMM and maybe some different focuses which could very well be present when comparing MD schools. And I also gather that many times DOs do not practice differently than MDs.

So...can I even talk about DO philosophy much on 2ndaries and interviews? It doesn't feel right to highlight philosophy differences when in practice things usually don't play out differently?

Any helps/thoughts would be appreciated.

 

[rddoms]

How did you find out about osteopathic medicine, and why did you apply? Was it a practicing DO, or did you hear about it from a college fair, etc?

I met a DO anesthesia resident as an undergrad, and she got me into osteopathic medicine. I didn't talk much about the 'DO philosophy', but I talked about how I liked an Alumni's personality and attitude. If there is something that is driving you to apply to DO schools, talk about that (it worked for me).

Good luck.

 

[JediZero]

Forgive my ignorance in the matter, I'm trying to do some research on the DO philosophy, and my question is pretty specific.

From what I gather, DO education is mostly the same as an MD education, aside from OMM and maybe some different focuses which could very well be present when comparing MD schools. And I also gather that many times DOs do not practice differently than MDs.

So...can I even talk about DO philosophy much on 2ndaries and interviews? It doesn't feel right to highlight philosophy differences when in practice things usually don't play out differently?

Any helps/thoughts would be appreciated.

You are right- in practice, DOs and MDs look pretty much the same. The main difference between the two is the philosophy behind them. That line becomes even more blurred as more MD schools begin embracing more holistic models of health care.

Really, the biggest practical difference between the two is OMM, but the numbers I've seen show that fewer than 10% of DOs actually use it in their practice.

 

[Ibn Rushd]

I was actually confused about this as well up until I read something last night. There's a really good description about the osteopathic philosophy on Western's website. I think it's a good read and it's fairly short too.

http://www.westernu.edu/xp/edu/comp/omm_history.xml

 

[herewego]

I was actually confused about this as well up until I read something last night. There's a really good description about the osteopathic philosophy on Western's website. I think it's a good read and it's fairly short too.

http://www.westernu.edu/xp/edu/comp/omm_history.xml

It was a good read, thanks for sharing. The only part I wasn't particularly convinced by was the explanation of "primary machinery of life." It's somewhat of a debatable logic jump to the conclusion IMO.

 

[Mtnbiker]

.

 

[schussboarder]

I wouldn't talk too much about the "DO philosophy" in the secondary. Many adcoms understand that a majority of DO's that students shadow never use OMM. I was talking with a faculty member the other day and similar to what JediZero said, he estimates that roughly 10-20% of DO's have used OMM after their residency training--the rest, haven't used it at all. I'd recommend just knowing how the education differs between the two.
One thing though--Certainly dont bring up things such as "the DO treats the whole person" or the "DO physician is more holistic". My brother just interviewed at a school and used that line and apparently the interviewer didn't like that response because he then thought that my brother was saying that MD's don't treat the whole person.

 

[JediZero]

I was actually confused about this as well up until I read something last night. There's a really good description about the osteopathic philosophy on Western's website. I think it's a good read and it's fairly short too.

http://www.westernu.edu/xp/edu/comp/omm_history.xml

Really enjoyed that, thank you. Interesting take on the musculoskeletal system being more important than the viscera... kind of a chicen-or-the-egg question as to which is more important, IMO.

It might help to shadow both an MD and a DO, rather than rely too much on what is posted. Spend your down time on rotations (what little there is) picking their brains.

I've shadowed several MD's and DO's, and thought they were all excellent doctors. That said, I definitely saw a difference in their interaction with patients. I used my observations in my essays, and would be happy to discuss them in an interview if the issue were raised.

Would you be willing to share some of them here? Especially having shadowed more than one of each, I'd really value your input in this discussion.

One thing though--Certainly dont bring up things such as "the DO treats the whole person" or the "DO physician is more holistic". My brother just interviewed at a school and used that line and apparently the interviewer didn't like that response because he then thought that my brother was saying that MD's don't treat the whole person.

Was the interviewer at an MD or a DO school? In any case, I think that more MD schools are getting on board with the idea of more holistic care, anyway, and the differences between the philosophies are getting smaller.

Funny story: I was visiting Georgetown last year and met with an admissions officer to talk about the school. I asked her how their motto of cura personalis was similar to or different from osteopathic whole-person care. She waved her hand dismissively and told me to "get a real medical education". I guess some people just can't look past prejudices and see how similar the two really are...

 

[schussboarder]

"Was the interviewer at an MD or a DO school? In any case, I think that more MD schools are getting on board with the idea of more holistic care, anyway, and the differences between the philosophies are getting smaller."

It was at a DO school, but the Dr. who was interviewing him was an MD who taught in the IM Department.

 

[EconFootball]

The American Osteopathic Association lists the "whole person" issue specifically as a difference between MDs and DOs.

http://www.osteopathic.org/index.cfm?PageID=ado_whatis

That's an official source. Your brother may just have been unlucky.

 

[forrealz]

The question asked in this thread has been on my mind ever since I started working on my secondaries.

I tried to compare my experiences with MDs and DOs, the experiences were certainly different but I wonder if such an observation is a reliable source to conclude on the differences in their training. Their practices might have been different depending upon their personalities. Everybody is different, I don't want to blame their differences on the training they received. At this point, I am just sort of lost when it comes to answering this question especially when it comes to the holistic approach. The way different physicians practice is, in my opinion, more dependent on subjectivity rather than what they learned in medical school.

 

[Styria]

I am five weeks into my DO school and have not once heard the faculty use the word "holistic," inside or outside of lectures. Rather they're much more specific about how posture and gait affect the rest of the body in sequence, about feedback mechanisms and loops between muscles and levels of nerves that affect the viscera, compensatory mechanisms, how diet and lifestyle can even affect gene expression, etc. The goal of the biochemistry class is to teach us that health begins at the cellular and molecular levels and to incorporate that into the view of the whole person. ("Structure and function" is critical for understanding molecular biology...) OMT has participation from faculty who specialized in internal medicine, family practice, PM&R, psychiatry, and emergency medicine to get it across to us that these tools are valuable anywhere. Our gross anatomy professor will teach the introduction to counterstrain lecture.

The difference is there if you want to look for it and to practice with that mindset later. "Holistic" is a tired meme that people here keep repeating (for or against osteopathy) while forgetting that the public jumps to naturopaths and yoga when they hear the word. Osteopathic philosophy is that the body is designed for health. Everything else, the dynamic unit of function, self-regulary/self-healing, structure and function flow from that. If you want to treat the whole person, go ahead and be an MD; "I treat the whole person" is no different from the claim "I'm a nice guy." I'm in an osteopathic school because I want to integrate everything I'm learning about how the body functions right from the start.

 

[rashneeva]

As far as the 'why D.O.' question in an interview: what's wrong with just saying that in my opinion one degree is as good as the other, and telling them that I'm really just interested in attending this particular school because I like the SCHOOL?

 

[Bacchus]

As far as the 'why D.O.' question in an interview: what's wrong with just saying that in my opinion one degree is as good as the other, and telling them that I'm really just interested in attending this particular school because I like the SCHOOL?

That's fine. You have to be "careful" though because some schools seem to be more osteopathic than others. Its a true response, so its also the best response.

 

[Eilat87]

to be honest, i think its just all a big fake front (hope i dont offend anyone), DO schools just want to be 'special' to stay alive and not have to be basically another MD school. I didnt write anything about osteopathic principles or whatnot on any of my secondaries and i still got plenty of interviews including KCOM (the founding school of osteopathic medicine). To be the same as the rest is to die in existence, they would serve no purpose. so hence why they keep promoting and pushing for this philosophy when in reality, its the same ****.

 

[Bacchus]

to be honest, i think its just all a big fake front (hope i dont offend anyone), DO schools just want to be 'special' to stay alive and not have to be basically another MD school. I didnt write anything about osteopathic principles or whatnot on any of my secondaries and i still got plenty of interviews including KCOM (the founding school of osteopathic medicine). To be the same as the rest is to die in existence, they would serve no purpose. so hence why they keep promoting and pushing for this philosophy when in reality, its the same ****.

Agreed. The AOA will never let us merge, change our degree, or co-exist as only one with the AMA.

 

[sylvanthus]

Im 4 weeks in and I have seen little difference in the DO education as compared to MD. The only thing we are learning that is different is OMM and quite frankly, thus far, I am only convinced that it has limited applicability. Furthermore, since I intend to work in emergency medicine, I do not think it will be useful. Though, I am a noob at the moment, so take it for what it's worth.

As for why I applied to DO schools. I bought into the whole "holistic" approach. But, so far am disappointed if the only thing we are learning that is "holistic" is OMM.....

 

[sylvanthus]

As far as the 'why D.O.' question in an interview: what's wrong with just saying that in my opinion one degree is as good as the other, and telling them that I'm really just interested in attending this particular school because I like the SCHOOL?

While I appreciate and applaud your desire to be honest, in the medical school application process it is usually best to just play the game.

 

[rashneeva]

While I appreciate and applaud your desire to be honest, in the medical school application process it is usually best to just play the game.

In that case . . .

I have shadowed both allopathic and osteopathic physicians, and while I feel there is more similarity than disparity between the two, the osteopaths share an esprit de corps that is intrinsically patient centric.

Hows that?

 

[Exalya]

I shadowed a D.O. who really did embody the philosophy in how he approached patients. He used OMM in 10-15% of his cases, where it was useful. I was glad to have had the experience, because I could actually write with some enthusiasm about the "D.O. Philosophy." If anything, I think the D.O. philosophy is just being a good doctor. Any good doctor is going to look at the patient from a big-picture standpoint.

 

[Mtnbiker]

.

 

[Exalya]

qft

Come again?

 

[rashneeva]

QFT = Quoted for Truth or alternatively Quantum Field Theory. I'll let you pick which mtnbiker meant.

 

[Mtnbiker]

QFT = Quoted for Truth or alternatively Quantum Field Theory. I'll let you pick which mtnbiker meant.

Yeah, sorry, I wasn't trying to be cryptic. I thought what you wrote was well put.

 

[USArmyDoc]

Really enjoyed that, thank you. Interesting take on the musculoskeletal system being more important than the viscera... kind of a chicen-or-the-egg question as to which is more important, IMO.



Would you be willing to share some of them here? Especially having shadowed more than one of each, I'd really value your input in this discussion.



Was the interviewer at an MD or a DO school? In any case, I think that more MD schools are getting on board with the idea of more holistic care, anyway, and the differences between the philosophies are getting smaller.

Funny story: I was visiting Georgetown last year and met with an admissions officer to talk about the school. I asked her how their motto of cura personalis was similar to or different from osteopathic whole-person care. She waved her hand dismissively and told me to "get a real medical education". I guess some people just can't look past prejudices and see how similar the two really are...

Who cares what she has to say....I actually find this soooo and enjoy rotating with MD students for this exact reason. Most of them are cool and don't even care, BUT if they do its always good to come prepared on every patient so when we are all getting pimped you know all the answers. It burns the students who think they are something great. (note: I do not do this with anyone from my school....just the d bags)

The best way to beat this is to be prepared and show your knowledge.

 

[Bacchus]

The philosophy is somewhat irritating. A patient-centered practice is what any physician should focus on. A lot of the propoganda out there is based on Still's breakaway period from the conventional medicine of the late 1800's. The only difference in my education and any of my friends at allopathic schools is the inclusion of OMM in our curriculum. Every DO school is going to flail the spirit stick and use "whole body, patient centered, yadda yadda." You have to look past that and realize you aren't a fully competent physician if your patients and their overall wellbeing is not your main focus and goal regardless of your degree.

Play the admissions game. Here at school we do have a lot of "Hurrah, we're going to be DOs" and at times it gets burdensome. I am proud to be an osteopathic medical student, but I'm moreso proud to be a future physician. MD or DO, our philosophy applies to every physician.

 

[reisub]

I thought this article was interesting:

Do osteopathic physicians differ in patient interaction from allopathic physicians? An empirically derived approach
TS Carey; TM Motyka; JM Garrett; RB Keller
JAOA. Vol 103. No 7. July 2003. 313-318
http://www.jaoa.org/cgi/content/abstract/103/7/313​

 

[Bacchus]

I thought this article was interesting:

Do osteopathic physicians differ in patient interaction from allopathic physicians? An empirically derived approach
TS Carey; TM Motyka; JM Garrett; RB Keller
JAOA. Vol 103. No 7. July 2003. 313-318
http://www.jaoa.org/cgi/content/abstract/103/7/313​

I read the abstract...but the source of information is the JAOA, the DO journal. I am not surprised by the findings.

 

[silas2642]

Forgive my ignorance in the matter, I'm trying to do some research on the DO philosophy, and my question is pretty specific.

From what I gather, DO education is mostly the same as an MD education, aside from OMM and maybe some different focuses which could very well be present when comparing MD schools. And I also gather that many times DOs do not practice differently than MDs.

So...can I even talk about DO philosophy much on 2ndaries and interviews? It doesn't feel right to highlight philosophy differences when in practice things usually don't play out differently?

Any helps/thoughts would be appreciated.

I don't know man, but I will say that I think it would be helpful if you could shadow a DO who actually practices if you're going to talk about it at your interview-- saw it for the first time and it sort of blew my mind. I have no idea what to think about it, but before I threw down six figures on an osteopathic education I would definitely like to see what I'm getting before I drink the KoolAid.

 

[EconFootball]

silas, just out of curiosity are you at an MD or DO school now?

 

[rkaz]

I thought this article was interesting:

Do osteopathic physicians differ in patient interaction from allopathic physicians? An empirically derived approach
TS Carey; TM Motyka; JM Garrett; RB Keller
JAOA. Vol 103. No 7. July 2003. 313-318
http://www.jaoa.org/cgi/content/abstract/103/7/313​

I looked at the abstract, and find it curious that they mention that DOs are more likely to call patients by the patient's first name. When I was taking classes in public health previously, it was mentioned to us multiple times that health providers should always ask a patient what he/she would prefer to be called (and when in doubt, always use the person's title like "Ms. Smith"). So just assuming that you can refer to the patient by his/her first name when that person didn't ask to be called by his/her first name can be seen as patronizing to some patients. So I don't know why the article would almost seem to presume that DOs greater likelihood to call patients by their first name is a good thing.... as it may or may not be.

 

[TheDuder]

The philosophy is somewhat irritating. A patient-centered practice is what any physician should focus on. A lot of the propoganda out there is based on Still's breakaway period from the conventional medicine of the late 1800's. The only difference in my education and any of my friends at allopathic schools is the inclusion of OMM in our curriculum. Every DO school is going to flail the spirit stick and use "whole body, patient centered, yadda yadda." You have to look past that and realize you aren't a fully competent physician if your patients and their overall wellbeing is not your main focus and goal regardless of your degree.

Play the admissions game. Here at school we do have a lot of "Hurrah, we're going to be DOs" and at times it gets burdensome. I am proud to be an osteopathic medical student, but I'm moreso proud to be a future physician. MD or DO, our philosophy applies to every physician.

👍

 

[herewego]

The philosophy is somewhat irritating. A patient-centered practice is what any physician should focus on. A lot of the propoganda out there is based on Still's breakaway period from the conventional medicine of the late 1800's. The only difference in my education and any of my friends at allopathic schools is the inclusion of OMM in our curriculum. Every DO school is going to flail the spirit stick and use "whole body, patient centered, yadda yadda." You have to look past that and realize you aren't a fully competent physician if your patients and their overall wellbeing is not your main focus and goal regardless of your degree.

Play the admissions game. Here at school we do have a lot of "Hurrah, we're going to be DOs" and at times it gets burdensome. I am proud to be an osteopathic medical student, but I'm moreso proud to be a future physician. MD or DO, our philosophy applies to every physician.

THANK YOU. That's what I needed to hear. On to playing the admissions game..

 

[droogdoc]

I looked at the abstract, and find it curious that they mention that DOs are more likely to call patients by the patient's first name. When I was taking classes in public health previously, it was mentioned to us multiple times that health providers should always ask a patient what he/she would prefer to be called (and when in doubt, always use the person's title like "Ms. Smith"). So just assuming that you can refer to the patient by his/her first name when that person didn't ask to be called by his/her first name can be seen as patronizing to some patients. So I don't know why the article would almost seem to presume that DOs greater likelihood to call patients by their first name is a good thing.... as it may or may not be.

I agree 100%. I dont care if I could cure cancer by placing my hand on a patient's forehead, I would never be so presumptuous to call a patient by his/her first name without asking first.

That is just simple respect.

 

[reisub]

I agree 100%. I dont care if I could cure cancer by placing my hand on a patient's forehead, I would never be so presumptuous to call a patient by his/her first name without asking first.

That is just simple respect.

Asking puts people on the spot, and they're likely to go along with whatever they think you want. Why don't we put those observational skills to work and figure out what people prefer without asking?

If he says, "Hi. I'm John." ... How is it respectful to call him "Mr Doe" when he clearly prefers "John"?

If she says, "Good morning. I'm Mrs Doe." ... Better call her "Mrs Doe".

 

[Back2School4DO]

I may have a unique perspective regarding this subject, so I wanted to offer my experience. As a licensed chiropractor who is pursuing a broader clinical scope, I know that the level of medical training will be top notch regardless. I chose the osteopathic route to broaden my spinal manipulative technique repertoire.

Those of you who have not actually applied spinal manipulation in a clinical setting should not make any conclusions regarding its efficacy. In the classroom setting, it's easy to get jaded because it's all just theory.😴 I was the same way, even through clinical rounds. Cracking your buddy's back is very different from treating someone that is being carried into your office in tears.😱 It wasn't until I actually applied my training out in the field that I saw how vital a tool it is. Don't misunderstand...it certainly isn't a cure-all as some crazy chiros would have you believe , but it will certainly come in handy in your practice.

I was actually disappointed to hear how few D.O.'s applied their OMT training. I got to experience this first hand as I "shadowed" a D.O. PM&R that I co-manage a couple patients with. A patient was referred to him by a GP to evaluate her low back/anterior hip pain. After radiographs ruled out arthritis in the hip joint, he performed a quick exam and discovered a tender SI joint, with recreation of pain upon lumbar extension. My kneejerk reaction was: lay her down and manipulate that joint! I had performed that exact type of intervention with great results many times just that day in my own office. He ended up referring her to PT for 2 months, and if that doesn't work...injections. I was a little disappointed because she could have been out of pain in 10 seconds if he had chosen to do something he was trained to do. Moral of the story...DON'T DISREGARD THIS PART OF YOUR TRAINING!

As far as the name issue: reisub said it well. Patients love our office because we treat them like friends. The patient's guard is lowered much quicker, and a much more effective history can be taken as a result. Also, patients are far less likely to litigate if they like you as a person.😉

Sorry so long. Just got my MCAT score (30) and am a little wound up.

 

[Animus]

In the real world most docs are far too busy to worry about things like this. MD/DO does not matter, it comes down to how you want to treat your patients and how you are with your patients. You will find just as many DO's that are come-offish pricks as you will MD's by percentage.

Medical school itself is about learning what medicine is. How you learn to be with your patients is your own personality and willingness to be a part of their lives and care.

BBBUUUTTT for admissions stuff I would try to experience a DO that incorporates OMM and has some ideas as to the philosophy so you have something to BS about.

 

[ceftazidime]

I read the abstract...but the source of information is the JAOA, the DO journal. I am not surprised by the findings.

Yes, it was published in the JAOA, but the author is a prominent professor of internal medicine at UNC-Chapel Hill.

 

[FloatOn]

In the real world most docs are far too busy to worry about things like this. MD/DO does not matter, it comes down to how you want to treat your patients and how you are with your patients. You will find just as many DO's that are come-offish pricks as you will MD's by percentage.

Medical school itself is about learning what medicine is. How you learn to be with your patients is your own personality and willingness to be a part of their lives and care.

BBBUUUTTT for admissions stuff I would try to experience a DO that incorporates OMM and has some ideas as to the philosophy so you have something to BS about.

Yeah, many MD-seeking pre-meds immediately dismiss DO schools. They don't realize that DO docs practice side-by-side with their MD colleagues. At the end of the day, both are still called Dr.'s.

 

[forrealz]

Yeah, many MD-seeking pre-meds immediately dismiss DO schools. They don't realize that DO docs practice side-by-side with their MD colleagues. At the end of the day, both are still called Dr.'s.

yay! less competition for me!

 

[Pet of the Week]

000

 

[EEL08]

The philosophy is somewhat irritating. A patient-centered practice is what any physician should focus on. A lot of the propoganda out there is based on Still's breakaway period from the conventional medicine of the late 1800's. The only difference in my education and any of my friends at allopathic schools is the inclusion of OMM in our curriculum. Every DO school is going to flail the spirit stick and use "whole body, patient centered, yadda yadda." You have to look past that and realize you aren't a fully competent physician if your patients and their overall wellbeing is not your main focus and goal regardless of your degree.

Play the admissions game. Here at school we do have a lot of "Hurrah, we're going to be DOs" and at times it gets burdensome. I am proud to be an osteopathic medical student, but I'm moreso proud to be a future physician. MD or DO, our philosophy applies to every physician.

This is how I feel exactly. It bothers me that it is implied or stated by some people that DOs have that more patient centered, whole person approach going on. We have one thing the MDs (most anyway) don't, OMM. If you're a jerk at a DO school you'll come across the same way to patients as a jerk at an MD school. I feel like some people do try to set us apart from the MDs but it feels more like a "we're the underdogs so we're going to work too hard to prove that we are special" kind of attitude.