DO's and anesthesiology

[llama9861]

I'm sure this question has been asked over and over but I can't find a simple answer. So, I'm SORRY for asking this question. Just looking for a very simple answer....


I'm a third year pharmacy student looking to apply to a DO program in '09. I eventually want to become an anesthesiologist after going to DO school. Will it be extremely difficult for me to find a anesthesiology residency as a DO (compared to an MD)?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[SexPanther]

I'm sure this question has been asked over and over but I can't find a simple answer. So, I'm SORRY for asking this question. Just looking for a very simple answer....


I'm a third year pharmacy student looking to apply to a DO program in '09. I eventually want to become an anesthesiologist after going to DO school. Will it be extremely difficult for me to find a anesthesiology residency as a DO (compared to an MD)?

No, if you work hard during your pre-clinical and clinical years and do well on boards you will have a good chance of matching. This site has multiple DOs at allopathic residencies. Vent, who is the man, is now chief at Rush. Idiopathic and I are DOs at Vandy. There are others I'm forgetting for sure. Just do your best and the rest will fall into place.

 

[llama9861]

Thanks alot.... love the name by the way...laughed for a good while. made from bits of real panther CLASSIC!

 

[VentdependenT]

I'm sure this question has been asked over and over but I can't find a simple answer. So, I'm SORRY for asking this question. Just looking for a very simple answer....


I'm a third year pharmacy student looking to apply to a DO program in '09. I eventually want to become an anesthesiologist after going to DO school. Will it be extremely difficult for me to find a anesthesiology residency as a DO (compared to an MD)?

It currently is not "extremely difficult" or "difficult" to match into an anesthesiology program as a DO. There are TONS of programs out there. You probably won't get MGH or Duke but so what. If you care that much about names then Hopkins and Yale are open to you.

Will it be easier to match as a USMD? I'd guess so as long as your scores/clinicals/letters/rank don't blow.

You're choosing a LONG road my intrepid friend. You may find other fields suit your goals and desires better than anesthesiology (or medicine for that matter!). In fact, you probably will. Then again, you may decide medicine is a hideous endeavor and wonder how you're going to repay pharmacy AND medical school debt. Then again you may just stick it out and join the rat race with the rest of us schmoes.

 

[smgilles]

No, if you work hard during your pre-clinical and clinical years and do well on boards you will have a good chance of matching. This site has multiple DOs at allopathic residencies. Vent, who is the man, is now chief at Rush. Idiopathic and I are DOs at Vandy. There are others I'm forgetting for sure. Just do your best and the rest will fall into place.

Exactly...I am at Mayo and 2 others in my class went to Hopkins and UMichigan. Study hard and do well on the USMLE's.

 

[climbingdocs]

I think the only reason why it would be harder is that there are still some old fashioned MDs that may look down on DO applicants. Overall if you kick ass on boards and have good letters I think you will have a good chance. At least this is my theory.

 

[RickKane]

In my experience PD's don't discriminate against DO's as much as they discriminate against low board scores. The USMLE is the great equalizer.

 

[climbingdocs]

In my experience PD's don't discriminate against DO's as much as they discriminate against low board scores. The USMLE is the great equalizer.

true true, altho there is this ortho program at place I will not mention, where PD said that as long as he is there no DO will get in, but there is always someone like that I guess

 

[anesguy1012]

true true, altho there is this ortho program at place I will not mention, where PD said that as long as he is there no DO will get in, but there is always someone like that I guess

No offense to the many qualified DOs, but in terms of the apparent status of his program, it just looks better to have MDs with low board scores than DOs. For the most part, DOs had lower test scores (I would assume) than their allopathic counterparts when entering medical school, hence the reason they went to osteopathic school. (I know this is not always the case.) It might have just switched when it came time to take the USMLE. As a result of seeing fellow residents who have failed Step 1 twice go on to become better residents than those with high scores, if I were a director the emphasis on USMLE scores would be less. The whole applicant needs to be looked at. I would prefer a person with well-rounded application than someone with little else but a 240 on a lucky day.

 

[Arch Guillotti]

Cross posting is such a drag.

 

[VentdependenT]

No offense to the many qualified DOs, but in terms of the apparent status of his program, it just looks better to have MDs with low board scores than DOs. For the most part, DOs had lower test scores (I would assume) than their allopathic counterparts when entering medical school, hence the reason they went to osteopathic school. (I know this is not always the case.) It might have just switched when it came time to take the USMLE. As a result of seeing fellow residents who have failed Step 1 twice go on to become better residents than those with high scores, if I were a director the emphasis on USMLE scores would be less. The whole applicant needs to be looked at. I would prefer a person with well-rounded application than someone with little else but a 240 on a lucky day.

Thats great and everything but it doesn't really answer the OP's question.

 

[anesguy1012]

Thats great and everything but it doesn't really answer the OP's question.

True.

 

[climbingdocs]

No offense to the many qualified DOs, but in terms of the apparent status of his program, it just looks better to have MDs with low board scores than DOs. For the most part, DOs had lower test scores (I would assume) than their allopathic counterparts when entering medical school, hence the reason they went to osteopathic school. (I know this is not always the case.) It might have just switched when it came time to take the USMLE. As a result of seeing fellow residents who have failed Step 1 twice go on to become better residents than those with high scores, if I were a director the emphasis on USMLE scores would be less. The whole applicant needs to be looked at. I would prefer a person with well-rounded application than someone with little else but a 240 on a lucky day.

hmmm I wonder how lucky do you have to be to score 240. Second, you really believe that MCAT score is a better predictor how good of a doctor someone will be? I know of people who scored in high 30s and they are slackers. Personally, people that show that they can work hard (hence better scores in med school) are better applicants. What RD wants a smart slacker. They want a slave with good work ethics. I think it just comes down to the DO/MD bias that will be there until.... we will have movies and TV show that main characters are DOs hehehe

 

[badgas]

It should be common sense that knowledge in areas such as organic chem and physics (MCAT) is MUCH more valuable to a physician than garbage like anatomy, physiology or pharm (USMLE). You have a really good point. I wonder which one you did better on??

 

[climbingdocs]

It should be common sense that knowledge in areas such as organic chem and physics (MCAT) is MUCH more valuable to a physician than garbage like anatomy, physiology or pharm (USMLE). You have a really good point. I wonder which one you did better on??

Dude, I use organic chem every day when I see my patients, ooo! and physics too!! But mostly math, trying to calculate how much money I will make and where I am going to invest it.

 

[anesguy1012]

It should be common sense that knowledge in areas such as organic chem and physics (MCAT) is MUCH more valuable to a physician than garbage like anatomy, physiology or pharm (USMLE). You have a really good point. I wonder which one you did better on??

If you're talking about me, I did progressively better on all my boards. I'm an anesthesiology resident. I'm just stating the case to defend those who would be excellent anesthesiologists but might have done poorly on the USMLE. My point was made by the previous poster who said that showing you did well on medical boards shows you worked hard, while MCAT exams mean little. If we use the warped logic used in the post, then doing poorly on the MCAT and then doing well on the USMLE shows you are an inconsistent hard worker. The same can be said for those who do well on the MCAT and then poorly on the USMLE. It just doesn't work that way. It's just a one day test (twice) and we're making career judgment calls. The whole applicant needs to be taken into consideration. I know a guy who worked as a construction worker throughout his entire medical school career and just didn't have time to devote to one area of his life. He ended up being taken by a radiology program, but the guy did poorly on exams. But, man, he will work without complaining like nobody's business. Very efficient...and smart. Just had obstacles that some medical students don't have to deal with.

 

[badgas]

No offense to the many qualified DOs, but in terms of the apparent status of his program, it just looks better to have MDs with low board scores than DOs. For the most part, DOs had lower test scores (I would assume) than their allopathic counterparts when entering medical school, hence the reason they went to osteopathic school. (I know this is not always the case.) It might have just switched when it came time to take the USMLE. As a result of seeing fellow residents who have failed Step 1 twice go on to become better residents than those with high scores, if I were a director the emphasis on USMLE scores would be less. The whole applicant needs to be looked at. I would prefer a person with well-rounded application than someone with little else but a 240 on a lucky day.

So why is a DO with a 240 "lucky" yet an MD with 182+ is qualified/competitive? You make the "one bad day" arguement for the USMLE yet this holds no weight for the MCAT, as students with good MCATs must just be smarter? Only allopaths can be well rounded?? I know... I'm not gonna get anywhere with this...

 

[anesguy1012]

So why is a DO with a 240 "lucky" yet an MD with 182+ is qualified/competitive? You make the "one bad day" arguement for the USMLE yet this holds no weight for the MCAT, as students with good MCATs must just be smarter? Only allopaths can be well rounded?? I know... I'm not gonna get anywhere with this...

I agree that ALL candidates (DO or MD) need to be evaluated completely, rather than the focus on scores. I am just saying that due to some program directors focusing mainly on scores to screen applicants, that they are losing out on some very good candidates. I, having been lucky to not have failed in my life as of yet, believe in the Bill Gates motto (not really HIS motto, but you get it) that those who are the most successful have failed the most. I believe someone who fails Step 1 twice but sticks with it through the humiliation and passes on the third time has good character and should not be rejected because of his or her initial failure.

I know, I know. It's not easy being a program director and I don't want the job.

 

[climbingdocs]

I agree that ALL candidates (DO or MD) need to be evaluated completely, rather than the focus on scores. I am just saying that due to some program directors focusing mainly on scores to screen applicants, that they are losing out on some very good candidates. I, having been lucky to not have failed in my life as of yet, believe in the Bill Gates motto (not really HIS motto, but you get it) that those who are the most successful have failed the most. I believe someone who fails Step 1 twice but sticks with it through the humiliation and passes on the third time has good character and should not be rejected because of his or her initial failure.

I know, I know. It's not easy being a program director and I don't want the job.

Ok, so you are saying "I believe someone who fails Step 1 twice but sticks with it through the humiliation and passes on the third time has good character and should not be rejected because of his or her initial failure."

But your first post you said "For the most part, DOs had lower test scores (I would assume) than their allopathic counterparts when entering medical school, hence the reason they went to osteopathic school." So you can forgive MD student failing USMLE, but not DO student to have low MCAT? What if someone scored 25 on MCAT, sucked on verbal reasoning, but then their USMLE score was in 230s, they are in top 20% of their class, had 90s percentile on their shelf tests. Just because they coudn't interpret some poetry crap on MCAT doesn't mean they are going to be worse doctor.

And I completely agree with you that all aplicants need not to be evaluated base one test, but even more not on being DO or MD.

 

[MedSchoolSLAKR]

I'll be honest, I think DO schools are easier than MD ones.

There's another problem. DO schools are popping up all over the country. There is basically no regulation as to what they teach, particularly when compared to the accreditation process for MD schools. At one of the "better" DO schools (that I have experience with) their students are only required to take 1 month of internal medicine. They don't take overnight call. The vast majority of DO schools are business enterprises out to make a profit off the students. It's a very different operation than the academic MD schools.

Just my 2 cents. I think the DO students are just as capable and intelligent. But I wonder about their expectations of work load and willingness to put in the long hours.

 

[ozzie20]

I'll be honest, I think DO schools are easier than MD ones.

There's another problem. DO schools are popping up all over the country. There is basically no regulation as to what they teach, particularly when compared to the accreditation process for MD schools. At one of the "better" DO schools (that I have experience with) their students are only required to take 1 month of internal medicine. They don't take overnight call. The vast majority of DO schools are business enterprises out to make a profit off the students. It's a very different operation than the academic MD schools.

Just my 2 cents. I think the DO students are just as capable and intelligent. But I wonder about their expectations of work load and willingness to put in the long hours.

you should wonder about most people's willingness to put in long hours. I dont know of anyone who likes working a lot and having little time off, DO, MD, or anyone else who is a member of the US workforce. Bottom line, work is work, no matter which way you cut it.

 

[climbingdocs]

I'll be honest, I think DO schools are easier than MD ones.

There's another problem. DO schools are popping up all over the country. There is basically no regulation as to what they teach, particularly when compared to the accreditation process for MD schools. At one of the "better" DO schools (that I have experience with) their students are only required to take 1 month of internal medicine. They don't take overnight call. The vast majority of DO schools are business enterprises out to make a profit off the students. It's a very different operation than the academic MD schools.

Just my 2 cents. I think the DO students are just as capable and intelligent. But I wonder about their expectations of work load and willingness to put in the long hours.

Well, I go to DO school and my surgery was two months, worked 90hrs on average. Internal med is 2 months working about 70-80 hrs a week. I don't know about other DO schools but ours kicks our butts. We are required to take shelf exams just like MD schools and we score pretty high on them. And we didn't get as much vacation as the other schools. I just hate when people generalize. DOs this and MDs that.

 

[anthroguy]

a lot of the DO schools are well established and have superior facilities than many MD schools. UMDNJ, PCOM, KCOM, UNECOM, CCOM, DMU, MSUCOM, TCOM, and OUCOM are DO schools that are clearly a cut above the rest and better than some MD schools. A lot of this has to do with funding and 4 of those schools are publicly funded.

 

[amyl]

Well, I go to DO school and my surgery was two months, worked 90hrs on average. Internal med is 2 months working about 70-80 hrs a week. I don't know about other DO schools but ours kicks our butts. We are required to take shelf exams just like MD schools and we score pretty high on them. And we didn't get as much vacation as the other schools. I just hate when people generalize. DOs this and MDs that.

yup, i was told on the first day of third year if you call in sick from the medicine floor you are in trouble....if you are not here, you had better be in the ICU. we had no vacation third year at all, none. it was up to our preceptors to be nice and not make us come in on christmas, etc.... but if you were on medicine you were working christmas, period. as a student i routinely was over 80h on medicine (2 months), cardiology, in patient peds, etc. while we were on the "lighter" outside rotations we took call doing admissions probably 7-8 times per month and 5 weekends out of the year on top of our regular rotations.
that said we had some visiting students from other DO schools that came to our hospital for outside rotations and they almost all invariably where on the edge of failing. they were the biggest slackers! and knew nothing! one guy showed up in march of fourth year and didn't know how to write a soap note.

now that i have had the chance to rotate at some MD affliated hospitals i have also met some super slackers there too...and some great people. but some of the md programs are CUSH on their students!
i think there are slacker MD programs and slacker DO programs. there are places you can hide and skate through third year if you want, probably in both the MD and DO worlds. I know at my school everyone knows which are the hard working programs and which are pulse-optional.
you can't draw the conclusion that in general DO programs are easier than MD. i have seen MD programs that were a cake walk compared to what i went through.

 

[pjm]

here's a profile of a DO couple; one anesthesiologist, one pediatrician.

http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/16/pf/young_doctors.moneymag/index.htm?cnn=yes

I'd like to know more about why he chose CCOM over UIC.

 

[Idiopathic]

i bet he didnt really get into UIC, it just doesnt make a whole lot of sense.

but a good article

 

[Disse]

i bet he didnt really get into UIC, it just doesnt make a whole lot of sense.

but a good article

I don't think he said he got into UIC. The article states he got into the "University of Illinois" but doesn't specify which location (i.e. Chicago vs. the other less populated campuses).

I know others who did similar specifically because they wanted to be in Chicago & not Rockford or Peoria.

Too bad. He then would not only pay $20k less in tuition but his living expenses would be significantly less as well (and he'd have much better 'connections' for residency).

He should have just said he wanted to live in Chicago.

 

[WhoopDeeDoo]

To clarify, University of Illinois basically = UIC when it comes to medical school. It's a bit confusing because there are four campuses but it is considered one institution. In fact when you apply to medical school there, you apply to get into UIC and then after you have been granted admission you get assigned a campus.

Plus, the article mentioned that tuition at U of I/UIC is only $9,000 -- which is very very wrong. Unless he was considering UIC 15 years ago, tuition has pretty much been between $20-26 grand for in-state tuition during the fall and spring semester. If he would have attended UIC with instate tuition and gotten government loans for the 4 years of tuition and living expenses, he would have been in about $180,000 in debt if he graduated a couple of years ago. Maybe whoever wrote the article looked up the tuition and quoated the one semester rate -- whatever.

Plus, if he chose not to go to UIC/U of I because he thought he would not have been able to be in Chicago for residency -- that's pretty wrong too. Considering that UIC tends to match a lot of their students into anesthesia and more than half of them match at Northwestern, UIC, U of Chicago, etc. every year.

Anyway, just pointing out some facts that were wrong in the article.