help w/ ranking, plz...

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

whorubigman

Member
7+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
20+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2003
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
z :laugh:

Members don't see this ad.
 
whorubigman said:
i'm trying to rank these programs. if anyone had any opinions of these programs (yes, i have read other postings regarding these programs, but i still want opinions, please)

columbia cornell
ucla
stanford
johns hopkins
baylor
temple
univ. of pittsburgh
cleveland
uci

thank you so much in advance!

Baylor has a huge gap after that it is a mish mosh to me.

On the east coast, i would say that cornell-columbia would be first with temple 2nd (have you looked at Jeff?) and hopkins a distant third (have you looked at Sinai?).
 
I big part of the equation is your particular interest? Do you want a program strong in MSK? SCI? Inpatient? Outpatient?


With regards to reputation, Baylor is certainly atop your list (very inpatient oriented, but the name is helpful during fellowship interviews). In my opinion the NYC programs are average or over-rated.

I think the Ohio programs are probably mid-level with good exposure to a spectrum of PM&R.

Hopkins is new, has a MSK fellowship, but requires a lot of travel.

Pitt seems to be improving all the time with consistently good reviews on this website.

Hope this helps.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
whorubigman said:
Definitely helps! Thx a bunch, buddy. I don't really have any particular interest in any parts of PMNR at this point. Pitts's improving all the time, yea... Good to know. Baylor's that famous? Didn't know that. Hopkins requres a lot of travel? Can you tell me how that's so? If any other thoughts arise on any of the programs above, please do so!

Hopkins does require a lot of travel. For example, you do a block of TBI at NRH in Washington because they don't have a lock down unit. You also go out to suburban hospitals and clinics a lot though their names elude me at this point. I believe most inpt is in the R1 year.
 
cyanocobalamin said:
Hopkins does require a lot of travel. For example, you do a block of TBI at NRH in Washington because they don't have a lock down unit. You also go out to suburban hospitals and clinics a lot though their names elude me at this point. I believe most inpt is in the R1 year.

PGY-2's do their in-house call, ortho, and SCI at Good Samaritan Hospital which can be about a 20 minute drive without traffic if I remember correctly. Baltimore is not a huge town with a lot of traffic relative to many other cities.

In addition to spending a decent amount of time at the Johns Hopkins Hospital and Kennedy Krieger Institute which are all on the same campus, they travel to the Bayview campus which is about 10-15 minutes away and a number of outpatient clinics which are on the outskirts of Baltimore, but as I said before, Baltimore isn't a hugely gridlocked city in the first place.

All in all, you definitely do need a car in Baltimore, but parking is not a huge concern from what I remember and aside from the NRH rotation in the PGY-4 year (which is not a bad experience in itself), I didn't consider the amount of driving they did to be excessive. (Then again, I am used to doing a lot of driving in southern California for rotations!)
 
I agree with mel about the JHU driving- to me it didn't seem far at all. Nothing like driving the 10 at any time of day in LA!!!
I guess its all personal perspective and how you see it compared to your life experiences. In retrospect I think there are very few programs that have no driving, that are located all on the same campus. (atleast from the ones I visited I can only think of one) Take Kessler for example, their driving is alot more extensive than JHU and much traffic from what I understand.

Of your programs listed, I would probably place the so.cal programs lower on my list unless you are locationally linked to area. (I have rotated at them), however so of your programs in the midwest I have never visited on rotated so I can't offer any opinion. I guess it all comes down to your priorities, what you want. You should make a list to hellp you sort it out. It'll make your decision much more clearer.
hope that helps
 
joseppi said:
I agree with mel about the JHU driving- to me it didn't seem far at all. Nothing like driving the 10 at any time of day in LA!!!
I guess its all personal perspective and how you see it compared to your life experiences. In retrospect I think there are very few programs that have no driving, that are located all on the same campus. (atleast from the ones I visited I can only think of one) Take Kessler for example, their driving is alot more extensive than JHU and much traffic from what I understand.

Of your programs listed, I would probably place the so.cal programs lower on my list unless you are locationally linked to area. (I have rotated at them), however so of your programs in the midwest I have never visited on rotated so I can't offer any opinion. I guess it all comes down to your priorities, what you want. You should make a list to hellp you sort it out. It'll make your decision much more clearer.
hope that helps

You're right. What's most important are my priorities. What are yours? Just out of curiosity... Thank you for your helpful words...
 
whorubigman said:
Thank you for your info. A huge gap at Baylor... What does that mean???

No invites from either Jeff or Sinai, unfortunately...

Temple's good, yea? I guess I'll be going there for the interview, then... Any other opionions you'd like to lay down?

I just mean that Baylor's national reputation is much bigger than any of the other programs you listed. Good luck in your search.
 
whorubigman said:
Definitely helps! Thx a bunch, buddy. I don't really have any particular interest in any parts of PMNR at this point. Pitts's improving all the time, yea... Good to know. Baylor's that famous? Didn't know that. Hopkins requres a lot of travel? Can you tell me how that's so? If any other thoughts arise on any of the programs above, please do so!


Be careful not to call PM&R PMNR on your interviews... It's Physical Medicine AND Rehabilitation.

People have been called on that in the past.

Good luck on all your interviews. Sounds like you are getting some quality ones.... :luck:
 
Out of curiousity, when I first began my journey looking into physiatry a year or two ago, I noticed the voice clip for the pronounciation of "physiatrist" was a lot different from how most people, perhaps, incorrectly, say it.

I thought it was interesting when I went on my interviews that once in awhile, I would find an attending who did make that distinction... and even an occasional patient too!
 
Some of the hard-core old timers will know that the correct pronunciation is phys-ee-a-trist. Most ppl don't care. The only thing is there's a possibility you will be interviewed by one of those hard core ppl in which case it may become a big deal.
 
axm397 said:
Some of the hard-core old timers will know that the correct pronunciation is phys-ee-a-trist. Most ppl don't care. The only thing is there's a possibility you will be interviewed by one of those hard core ppl in which case it may become a big deal.
What drives me nuts by these old timers is how they have hampered our credibility as a medical specialty. Over the years I have come to realize that most physicians in other specialties and patients doubt that I am really a physician when I refer to myself as a physiatrist-it sounds too much like physiotherapist, which residency did not, but should have prepared me for; when I refer to myself as an expert in rehabilitation medicine, I am considered no different from the therapists(PT/OT/ST) who title thier progress notes from dept of rehabilitation medicine, so there I lose credibility for my own physician skills as well. I have found that I get the most credibility and respect from collegues and patients who meet me initally when I describe myself as a expert in neuromuscular disease or a non-surgical orthopedic specialist, which is my reason for choosing this specialty. I wish the old timers in our specialty had more foresight in naming our specialty so we would have greater credibility as a medical specialty by now.
 
This discussion reminds me of a some editorials I read by Dr. Johnson from the American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. And it reminds of the time when the psychiatry service consulted PMNR :)

Volume 75(2), March/April 1996, p 83

Editorial
[Editorial]
Johnson, Ernest W. MD, Editor

The Compleat Physiatrist
Dr. Frank Krusen invented the term “physiatrist” and urged its pronunciation as “fiz-[horizontal bar over]e-a'-trist” with the accent on the third syllable. This term described a physician who used physical agents to treat injury and disease. In the old days, it was ultraviolet, electricity, water, exercise, and heat.

Soon it became apparent that exercise was the most important modality in restoring function after a disabling condition. The classic one in the 1940s was polio. Then stroke, spinal cord injury, and head injury assumed primacy in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation management expertise.

All along the implication was that physiatrists were the “function” doctors, and musculoskeletal diagnostic treatment principles were essential in the process. Logically then, industrial and sport injuries (90% nonsurgical) seemed appropriate substrate for physiatric management.

Thus developed a meld of physical treatment and rehabilitation, which received official sanction when the American Board of Medical Specialties (then the Advisory Board of Medical Specialties) agreed to add Rehabilitation to the American Board of Physical Medicine in 1949. (continues further)


Volume 80(3), March 2001, p 161

Physiatric Misnomers
[Editorial]
Johnson, Ernest W. MD, Editor

With more of our colleagues going into the literary mode, it seems appropriate to list some of the frequent syntactic missteps encountered in our literature and conferences.

First, and most egregiously reiterative, is the misuse of the word extremity. In the most recent edition (27th) of Stedman s Medical Dictionary, the entry under extremity says One of the ends of an elongated or pointed structure. Incorrectly used to mean limb.

One cannot pick up a recent text or even a physiatric or orthopedic journal without this inapt mention of an extremity, when clearly the limb is meant. How often have you read, amputation of the lower extremity, when an above-the-knee absence was implied? Or, upper-extremity pain being listed for tennis elbow?

Extremity is a HAND or FOOT, never a limb, only the end of a limb.

Radiating pain is an ubiquitous term infecting our (and medical in general) literature. Pain does not radiate if one realizes that radiating means a continuous line from a point source. Obviously, pain can, and often does, refer to a distal site from a noxious source but rarely, if ever, would it radiate.

Radicular pain does NOT radiate; it refers to the buttock, shin, calf, or foot.

When are we going to see the end of deep tendon reflexes? These are muscle stretch reflexes! I read them in almost every case report to our Journal.

Another facet of our fractured syntax is pronunciation.

As spelled, facet is almost universally mispronounced by physiatrists (especially interventional practitioners). The accent is on the first syllable: fac-et. To pronounce it fa-cet is incorrect! That is the European pronunciation of facette, c ertainly not the spelling in the United States literature.

Power is often misused when strength or force is meant, most notably when reporting muscle function. Power is work per unit of time.

Inadvertent means careless, not unintentional. This is rampant throughout the literature, as well as in our lectures and other presentations.

Physiatrists (pronounced PHYS-I-A’-TRISTS) still cannot appreciate the origin of our specialty s name. Our forbear, Frank Krusen from Mayo Clinic, invented the word and wrote extensively on how to pronounce it and why! It gets confused with psychi atry and podiatry if the second syllable is accented.

Communication depends on accurate syntax. Need there be any other reason to be precise? I think not!

I've never read Dr. Krusen's writings on the subject of our specialty's name. Has anyone else?

Our chairman emeritus gave us a talk about the history of PM&R, and he said the first physical medicine docs were radiologists!

from the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine (they publish the Archives w/ the AAPM&R) website

1923
The Congress was founded as the American College of Radiology and Physiotherapy, a professional association of physicians who used physical agents to diagnose and treat illness and disability. The first elected president of the organization was Samuel B. Childs, MD.

1925
The trend toward specialization in medicine resulted in a separation of radiology from physical therapy and a change in name to the American Congress of Physical Therapy. The 1925 Annual Meeting of the Congress was promoted in the Journal of Radiology

1926
The journal (the present day Archives), which began publication in 1920, changed its name to the Archives of Physical Therapy, X-ray, Radium and was declared the official journal of the American Congress of Physical Therapy. In 1930, Albert F. Tyler, MD, presented the Archives to the Congress as a debt-free, unencumbered gift.

(I'm a bit of a history buff, can you tell?)
 
If you've met Dr. Johnson (and you will if you interview at OSU), you'll get the real-time version of his editorial. :laugh:
 
Finally M3 said:
If you've met Dr. Johnson (and you will if you interview at OSU), you'll get the real-time version of his editorial. :laugh:
I have had the pleasure of both reading Dr. Johnson’s works as well as hearing him speak regarding this subject, and he is indeed, enlightening.

The problem, of course, is his dogmatic and rigid stance on the subject (although I tend to think his hyperbole is purposeful).

William Safire wrote a column entittled "on language" in the NY Times Magazine Section each Sunday for the past 30 years. While the arbiter of all things correct, his primary tenant was that language's purpose was, first and foremost to communicate, and that usage trumped rules.

Thus even though Dr. Krusen may well have advocated the notion that we are physzeeatrists, no one in the real world actually says that without sounding incredibly pompous and affected. So sure, use it when you interview to suck up to PD's and Department Chairs, but as you do so, recognize that, other than when speaking to Dr. Johnson, that is the last time you will have to say something quite that silly.

Likewise, whether Dr. Johnson likes it or not, almost every H&P in hospitals across the country these days will include a stick figure representing DTR's, and references to UE's and LE's, not muscle stretch reflexes and limbs. He may see that as the end of civilization - I just see it as acknowledging that sometimes you just have to stop tilting at windmills
 
Top