KCUMB to offer MD,DO degree?????

[WDeagle]

Is anyone else suprised by this? I mean around here Pletz is pretty highly respected. I'm not sure, but I think we've built an entirely new campus (as in all new buildings, moved a block or two) since she got here. Everyone here was always telling us how great she is and how she transformed the school. I'm talking about professors who have been here for 25 years telling us that. It just seems so sudden.

Yea she basically took the school from being an average school to being one of the best. I think she might have been the highest paid school president in the country at some point. It seems like the school made a huge effort to keep her around. So this whole thing is pretty shocking. Although i kinda get the feeling she might have rubbed alot of faculty/students the wrong way. She was pretty distant from the actual KCUMB environment. In fact, i think the only time ive seen her was when she introduced the surgeon general when he came to campus last year. I would assume that the next president will be more student friendly and more present on campus.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[HopefulDoc2007]

Is anyone else suprised by this? I mean around here Pletz is pretty highly respected. I'm not sure, but I think we've built an entirely new campus (as in all new buildings, moved a block or two) since she got here. Everyone here was always telling us how great she is and how she transformed the school. I'm talking about professors who have been here for 25 years telling us that. It just seems so sudden.

It seems pretty sudden to me too (current KCUMB student). If she was fired because of the dual degree plan I am going to be REALLY upset. I sincerely hope it was not because of this.

 

[EmersonAnne]

Is anyone else suprised by this? I mean around here Pletz is pretty highly respected. I'm not sure, but I think we've built an entirely new campus (as in all new buildings, moved a block or two) since she got here. Everyone here was always telling us how great she is and how she transformed the school. I'm talking about professors who have been here for 25 years telling us that. It just seems so sudden.

I know I'm floored. I can't believe they fired her and I can't believe they announced they did to all us in email.

 

[HopefulDoc2007]

I know I'm floored. I can't believe they fired her and I can't believe they announced they did to all us in email.

http://www.kcumb.edu/NewsDetail.asp?id=48

"Due to the fact that this is an employment issue, no further comment about her termination will be issued."


Does this upset anyone else? I don't think the firing of the president is an "employment issue" and I think students deserve some kind of explanation. It's not like it isn't going to come out in the news or something right? I would rather hear it from the school admin than from google news.

 

[drashy]

(Current KCUMB 4th year)
I think it is pretty obvious what went down. After being at KCUMB for the past couple of years, I can figure out what happened. Pletz sent out that email to alumni (as seen on page 2 of the discussions). This was obviously not the time to do that, and I am sure the feedback from alumni was ridiculous. It was just her action of sending out that email that really killed her career.

 

[JaggerPlate]

That's nuts.

 

[UHS97]

I was a second year when Dr. Perrin was fired by the Board in 1996. Dr. Weaver (whose name is on the university auditorium) took over, just as his Son is now doing. We were all shocked and frankly scared at the time. Dr. Perrin even met with us off campus but couldn't say much because of legal issues. He was very liked by the students at the time. There were angry alumni who showed up for a Board meeting on campus later that year, but the board did what it wanted as they are doing now.

My class first met Dr Pletz at graduation because we were off on rotations when she started, but I have to say that I have been very impressed by the University's progress and improved image during her years of leadership.

I would just say to the students and applicants not to worry as this will pass. Work hard during your rotations/residency and you will succeed. Neither the AOA nor the KCUMB board can hold you back.

As a retina surgeon who completed an ACGME residency and fellowship, trust me when I say, you can do anything you want as long as you shine on your rotations/residency.

 

[WDeagle]

http://www.kcumb.edu/NewsDetail.asp?id=48

"Due to the fact that this is an employment issue, no further comment about her termination will be issued."


Does this upset anyone else? I don't think the firing of the president is an "employment issue" and I think students deserve some kind of explanation. It's not like it isn't going to come out in the news or something right? I would rather hear it from the school admin than from google news.

Yea strange timing with the building of the new gym/library, the new campus in SW MO, the new hospital affiliations in KC and the residencies that go along with it. The second years did really well on the USMLE last year and the residency match last year went phenomenally well. It just doesnt seem like a logical time to change leadership. I hope the board of trustees knew what they were doing.

 

[HopefulDoc2007]

(Current KCUMB 4th year)
I think it is pretty obvious what went down. After being at KCUMB for the past couple of years, I can figure out what happened. Pletz sent out that email to alumni (as seen on page 2 of the discussions). This was obviously not the time to do that, and I am sure the feedback from alumni was ridiculous. It was just her action of sending out that email that really killed her career.

I thought the KCUMB alumni were more progressive (not sure if that is the right word). In other words, based on my admittedly limited experience, I thought the majority of alums would support that type of idea. Not only that but I have seen the email and it didn't say that the decision was already made, only that she wanted input from alumni regarding the possibility. She also emphasized that we would still be an osteopathic medical school, just with an additional accreditation. I wish they would have asked students about this since it would have such a big impact on us.

 

[engineeredout]

Can't they just leave things alone? I'm studying for a DO, I want my DO, not a degree that I didn't earn and is only coming on the side as a technicality.

 

[HopefulDoc2007]

Can't they just leave things alone? I'm studying for a DO, I want my DO, not a degree that I didn't earn and is only coming on the side as a technicality.

The truth is that we earn both degrees already (same job, same training essentially). I study to be a physicians not a DO or MD. The differences are really small/non-existant. The LCME accreditation has some benefits for students that can't be denied.

 

[drashy]

I thought the KCUMB alumni were more progressive (not sure if that is the right word). In other words, based on my admittedly limited experience, I thought the majority of alums would support that type of idea. Not only that but I have seen the email and it didn't say that the decision was already made, only that she wanted input from alumni regarding the possibility. She also emphasized that we would still be an osteopathic medical school, just with an additional accreditation. I wish they would have asked students about this since it would have such a big impact on us.

I don't think think alumni would want this. It would only serve to dilute their degree as 'just a D.O.' degree.
Besides, I'm with some of the other posters, I've had to explain for too damn long what a D.O. actually is, do you really think I want to explain what more initials mean?!!

 

[HopefulDoc2007]

I don't think think alumni would want this. It would only serve to dilute their degree as 'just a D.O.' degree.
Besides, I'm with some of the other posters, I've had to explain for too damn long what a D.O. actually is, do you really think I want to explain what more initials mean?!!

I can see your point. Honestly, I support the LCME accreditation for reasons other than the initials behind my name. I would support getting the additional accreditation and leaving the degree or initials as DO.

 

[Handy388]

it seems like this president only cared for the reputation of the school, nothing about osteopathy philosphy at all.

 

[HopefulDoc2007]

I don't think think alumni would want this. It would only serve to dilute their degree as 'just a D.O.' degree.
Besides, I'm with some of the other posters, I've had to explain for too damn long what a D.O. actually is, do you really think I want to explain what more initials mean?!!

I guess I had not thought of this type of move diluting our alumni's degrees. From my perspective, if this didn't get changed until after I graduated, I would have graduated from an excellent medical school that is capable of receiving accreditation from both organizations governing physician education in the US. I do understand your concern though. Anyway, regardless, I hope things turn out well for us all.

 

[Doctor Bagel]

it seems like this president only cared for the reputation of the school, nothing about osteopathy philosphy at all.

Is that necessarily bad? Her job was to make the school as good as it could be, not to further the goals of osteopathic medicine. It sounds like she was a positive force for KCUMB, and it also sounds like the board was pretty rash in their decision-making.

 

[HopefulDoc2007]

it seems like this president only cared for the reputation of the school, nothing about osteopathy philosphy at all.

Osteopathic philosophy (by my definition, ensuring students are well rounded and address all of their patients needs) is alive and well at KCUMB. According to the email Pletz sent out we would continue to teach OMT and little would change in the school itself. In my experience, her concern for the reputation of the school is what has made KCUMB so great.

 

[k4med]

As a KCUMB student, I can attest to the fact that most of the students at KCUMB didn't even know the school was applying for LCME accreditation. It goes without saying then that the board would not want us to know they fired our president because she was pushing for LCME accreditation. If they had told us this after the fact, there would have been a great number of students upset with their decision. As someone who was aware that the president was planning to submit the application, I can say that there were a great many people who were not pleased with it. They gave several reasons, such as that our basic sciences department was not sufficient for LCME standards, and that the amount of research done at our school was too minimal. There is also the fact that KCUMB does not bring in very many research grants, which limits the school's resources to tuition and donations. Though I doubt many students would have minded receiving both an MD and DO, there are some who would not want to take both licensing boards as would be required. There were many obstacles to the idea of accreditation, and there was not enough support to generate the ability to overcome these obstacles.

I, for one, am disappointed to see Pletz go. Though I never met her, the school appeared to be flourishing under her leadership, and with her gone, any hope of my class attaining the MD/DO degree goes with her.

 

[HopefulDoc2007]

As a KCUMB student, I can attest to the fact that most of the students at KCUMB didn't even know the school was applying for LCME accreditation. It goes without saying then that the board would not want us to know they fired our president because she was pushing for LCME accreditation. If they had told us this after the fact, there would have been a great number of students upset with their decision. As someone who was aware that the president was planning to submit the application, I can say that there were a great many people who were not pleased with it. They gave several reasons, such as that our basic sciences department was not sufficient for LCME standards, and that the amount of research done at our school was too minimal. There is also the fact that KCUMB does not bring in very many research grants, which limits the school's resources to tuition and donations. Though I doubt many students would have minded receiving both an MD and DO, there are some who would not want to take both licensing boards as would be required. There were many obstacles to the idea of accreditation, and there was not enough support to generate the ability to overcome these obstacles.

I, for one, am disappointed to see Pletz go. Though I never met her, the school appeared to be flourishing under her leadership, and with her gone, any hope of my class attaining the MD/DO degree goes with her.

My understanding was that the school was preparing to apply for LCME accreditation. In other words, I was expecting any loose ends/changes that needed to be made to be done before we applied. I didn't foresee the USMLE/COMLEX issue being a problem since the vast majority of students take both already. The cat seems to be out of the box (as far as the reason for firing Pletz goes) and I hope the school responds to students with some kind of explanation.

 

[JaggerPlate]

it seems like this president only cared for the reputation of the school, nothing about osteopathy philosphy at all.

Her title was President and CEO of KCUMB, not Emperor of Osteopathy. She was doing her job and looking out for her students first and foremost, but was also pretty clear in wanting to protect osteopathic medicine in the changing health care climate. I don't know why you incite issues on these boards so much, but it's getting old.

 

[WDeagle]

it seems like this president only cared for the reputation of the school, nothing about osteopathy philosphy at all.

Thats a fair assesment. She was definately more concerned whether or not students had every opportunity to succeed rather than pleasing the old fart osteopaths. I give her credit for pointing out exactly what was wrong with osteopathic medicine and for attempting to do something about it. Unfortunately it was probably the reason for her being ousted as president two days later.

 

[DiverDoc]

.

 

[WDeagle]

As a KCUMB student, I can attest to the fact that most of the students at KCUMB didn't even know the school was applying for LCME accreditation. It goes without saying then that the board would not want us to know they fired our president because she was pushing for LCME accreditation. If they had told us this after the fact, there would have been a great number of students upset with their decision. As someone who was aware that the president was planning to submit the application, I can say that there were a great many people who were not pleased with it. They gave several reasons, such as that our basic sciences department was not sufficient for LCME standards, and that the amount of research done at our school was too minimal. There is also the fact that KCUMB does not bring in very many research grants, which limits the school's resources to tuition and donations. Though I doubt many students would have minded receiving both an MD and DO, there are some who would not want to take both licensing boards as would be required. There were many obstacles to the idea of accreditation, and there was not enough support to generate the ability to overcome these obstacles.

I, for one, am disappointed to see Pletz go. Though I never met her, the school appeared to be flourishing under her leadership, and with her gone, any hope of my class attaining the MD/DO degree goes with her.

Yea i dont think she will be unemployed for long. What she did with our school is pretty amazing. Too bad she wont get to finish what she started.

 

[Roberie]

Yea i dont think she will be unemployed for long. What she did with our school is pretty amazing. Too bad she wont get to finish what she started.

PNWU's president recently stepped down...So there's an opening in my neck of the woods!

 

[JaggerPlate]

You know ... I may regret this post, but I just have to say that I'm really disappointed with this situation from every possible way I look at it:

From what I can tell:

1. This dual program was essentially thought up by the President without anyone knowing. Students weren't informed, current applicants weren't informed etc. Should they have been? Debatable, but I know that I personally am in the application process and was pretty shocked to hear a school I was applying to was in the process of essentially changing the degree their medical school offered.

2. The email sent around was given to alumni, not current students. I guess this was to keep things calm on campus, etc, but essentially everyone who found out on SDN did so through an email posted by someone who created an account just to post it.

3. It seems like the gun was completely jumped on whether or not the LCME was even going to approve KCUMB. Or maybe not??? Who knows, because there was no transparency whatsoever in the process. And again, maybe it was none of my (or our I guess) damn business, but it still just created a weird panic/sense of confusion when this whole scheme was dropped on the world suddenly without knowing it was happening along the way. It seems like two days ago, KCUMB was a DO school that happened to have a supposed LCME visit a while ago, and then with one email it was going to now be a DO, MD trailblazer????

4. The AOA automatically took the defensive and really seemed to give the situation zero thought. It felt like a complete knee jerk reaction to simply try and shut it down. This seems even more strange because it felt like a situation where they could interject and possibly control, which makes even more sense to me because every DO-Online blog post is simply a rebuttal to changing the degree to MD, DO (which I think the AOA can actually do without LCME site accreditation).

5. When the idea was brought up, older DOs came out of the wood works to tell us it was the end of the profession, and the thread in the pre-MD forum turned into an ass hurt fest about someone else using the blessed MD title (I guess the concept of MBBS and FMG's using it wasn't worth discussing, but not those damn osteopaths). Neither of these are surprising, but still just disappointing.

6. THEN the President was removed from her position after 14 years of service and essentially erased from KCUMB very quickly. Not only that, but it seemed like she was a person the current students really liked.

Maybe I'm being a baby, maybe cynical, whatever ... but this whole situation has pretty much disappointment me from just about every angle imaginable, and I feel like it's kinda embarrassing to DOs to have this thing brought up, shuffled and disputed all over, then to end with someone loosing their job (for whatever reason).

 

[spicedmanna]

Well, in characteristic KCUMB fashion, I am hearing about this news for the first time from a secondary source. I'm no longer shocked by what goes on or by the suddenness of change or transition at KCUMB, as it tends to happen that way from my experience and has even defined my time there. There have been a lot of interesting changes and events that occurred in the last few years. Not all of them, in my opinion, have been good, or the best use of resources. I don't know what the final push was for President Pletz's exit, but I doubt it was completely sudden or rash. I don't know and don't really care at this point. I try to stay out of the politics and focus on my work. Whatever the case, I'm sure things are going to be okay.

 

[spicedmanna]

Not only that, but it seemed like she was a person the current students really liked.

I don't know about that. I think that there are alum and students that don't and haven't favored her and/or her ideas of late, or their sequelae.

 

[spicedmanna]

Let's try not to start or propagate any rumors. None of us really knows what happened or the reasons behind the action.

 

[JaggerPlate]

Let's try not to start or propagate any rumors. None of us really knows what happened or the reasons behind the action.

If that was directed at me, I apologize. I'm not trying to propagate rumors whatsoever, I'm just frustrated with the situation and was trying to explain why I see it as so irritating and disappointing from just about every point of view. Obviously I do not pretend to know what happens on a board of directors, nor do I know the reasoning behind their decision. If the post was inappropriate, I'll remove it ... I don't want to be the one spreading fear and unsubstantiated claims.

 

[spicedmanna]

If that was directed at me, I apologize. I'm not trying to propagate rumors whatsoever, I'm just frustrated with the situation and was trying to explain why I see it as so irritating and disappointing from just about every point of view. Obviously I do not pretend to know what happens on a board of directors, nor do I know the reasoning behind their decision. If the post was inappropriate, I'll remove it ... I don't want to be the one spreading fear and unsubstantiated claims.

No, it's okay, Jagger. I think your comments are fine. I was just making a general statement because I can see this going out of control very quickly. The truth is that none of us knows what's behind all this. I suppose in time we will.

 

[JaggerPlate]

I can see this going out of control very quickly. The truth is that none of us knows what's behind all this. I suppose in time we will.

QFT

 

[HopefulDoc2007]

If that was directed at me, I apologize. I'm not trying to propagate rumors whatsoever, I'm just frustrated with the situation and was trying to explain why I see it as so irritating and disappointing from just about every point of view. Obviously I do not pretend to know what happens on a board of directors, nor do I know the reasoning behind their decision. If the post was inappropriate, I'll remove it ... I don't want to be the one spreading fear and unsubstantiated claims.

+1

I don't mean to spread rumors either. I guess I wish there was a more explanatory announcement so there wouldn't be so much speculation.

 

[exPCM]

I am a KCUMB alumni. Earlier today an email was sent to alumni (perhaps current students too?) from President Karen Pletz regarding the DO/MD degree, see below:


Recently, an e-mail was circulated regarding KCUMB's consideration of the offering of a dual DO/MD degree. That e-mail stated that a proposal had been presented tot he KCUMB Board to seek this degree and the LCME accreditation which would be required in order to offer a dual degree.

First, to clarify, the University faculty and staff have been exploring ways to ensure that the future of osteopathic medical education remains viable in the face of a number of serious concerns, including:

§ the AAMC mandate to increase class size by 30% by 2015;

§ the continued failure to raise the federal caps on post doctoral training slots in the U.S.;

§ the dramatic increase in accreditation of new osteopathic medical schools and increases in class sizes/and/or additional locations by others;

§ the restriction of VSAS – Visiting Student Application Service – the centralized application service for allopathic clinical clerkship electives, which over 60% of our students currently fill – to allopathic students only, excluding osteopathic students;

§ the increasing pressure on allopathic post doctoral programs, in which 62% of KCUMB graduates seek residency slots and the certain indication that these slots will go first to graduates of LCME accredited schools;

§ the increasing prevalence of Caribbean medical schools contracting with hospital systems across the country for exclusive rights to clinical clerkships;

§ the current AOA/COCA initiatives to accredit foreign osteopathic medical schools without requiring them to assure available residency slots for the period of seven years.

These very real concerns, which were thoroughly discussed in the spring Communicator titled The Changing Landscape of Medicine, have led to the consideration of a major leadership move for osteopathic medical education.

We would remain an osteopathic institution. We are not considering an MD option, as the Texas College of Osteopathic Medicine Board of Regents approved during the third week of November. We also are not considering giving applicants a choice of degree.

All student applicants to KCUMB's College of Osteopathic Medicine would be applying for a dual degree, from a College of Osteopathic Medicine. But having that dual degree offers access by our students and graduates to programs currently or increasingly restricted to graduates of LCME accredited institutions.

These issues have been identified as of major concern by AACOM and other osteopathic institutions, as well as the AOA.

KCUMB, as you know, has worked continuously to build the quality of our programs and to keep a continuous strategic eye to the future.

It has been our practice to endeavor to have control over our future, and not wait for external circumstances to control us.

If you have questions or concerns, or wish to provide input, please let me know.

Once again, we are and always will be an osteopathic college of Medicine (KCUMB-COM) and our mission would not change. We are considering this opportunity in order to advance osteopathic medical education, and the opportunities to our students in the future.

That is our charge.

Best wishes for a wonderful holiday season!

Karen L. Pletz, J.D.
President and Chief Executive Officer
Kansas City University of Medicine and Biosciences
1750 Independence Ave.
Kansas City, MO 64106-1453
816-283-2301
816-283-2303 (fax)
[email protected]

Dr. Pletz is a hero in my book and it is a disgrace that she was sacked. Everything she wrote in that email above is true. She has correctly outlined key future issues that many in osteopathic medicine do not want discussed out in the open.
I have talked to several older osteopathic faculty members recently who have told me that with current and future school openings as well as increasing enrollments and the flat number of residency program positions we will see a situation in the future where the Carribean schools fold as their graduates can no longer match in significant numbers. That is IMO a big reason that RVU was established since the owners of AUC know that AUC as a medical school basically has Stage IV colon cancer and will be in hospice in the near future. Ross University has tried to establish a school in Wyoming in the past and I will be very surprised if they don't make a further attempt within the next 2 years. The osteopathic faculty I talked to also forsee significant numbers of US osteopathic grads unable to get into residency slots starting in about 2020 as well. When I asked them what they planned to do about it they said they plan to do nothing since they were all going to be retired by 2020. So they basically told me that they don't give a darn about the problem. Here we have someone who is trying to look ahead (Dr. Pletz) and is willing to look at important issues and she gets fired. It is very sad to me to see people get slammed for bringing the truth out into the open.

Anyone who thinks that having twice as many osteopathic graduates (and rising) as the number of AOA osteopathic residency positions is a good thing is nuts IMHO. However the leadership of the AOA basically doesn't seem to give a hoot and they will let the bubble continue to grow until it bursts. They seem to think all the excess students will be soaked up by ACGME programs. However, about 20% of residency program directors are IMGs and there is nothing that requires them to give preference to US grads. There will be a lot of pain in the future before this is all sorted out.

 

[exPCM]

I am a KCUMB alumni. Earlier today an email was sent to alumni (perhaps current students too?) from President Karen Pletz regarding the DO/MD degree, see below:


Recently, an e-mail was circulated regarding KCUMB's consideration of the offering of a dual DO/MD degree. That e-mail stated that a proposal had been presented tot he KCUMB Board to seek this degree and the LCME accreditation which would be required in order to offer a dual degree.

First, to clarify, the University faculty and staff have been exploring ways to ensure that the future of osteopathic medical education remains viable in the face of a number of serious concerns, including:

§ the AAMC mandate to increase class size by 30% by 2015;

§ the continued failure to raise the federal caps on post doctoral training slots in the U.S.;

§ the dramatic increase in accreditation of new osteopathic medical schools and increases in class sizes/and/or additional locations by others;

§ the restriction of VSAS – Visiting Student Application Service – the centralized application service for allopathic clinical clerkship electives, which over 60% of our students currently fill – to allopathic students only, excluding osteopathic students;

§ the increasing pressure on allopathic post doctoral programs, in which 62% of KCUMB graduates seek residency slots and the certain indication that these slots will go first to graduates of LCME accredited schools;

§ the increasing prevalence of Caribbean medical schools contracting with hospital systems across the country for exclusive rights to clinical clerkships;

§ the current AOA/COCA initiatives to accredit foreign osteopathic medical schools without requiring them to assure available residency slots for the period of seven years.

These very real concerns, which were thoroughly discussed in the spring Communicator titled The Changing Landscape of Medicine, have led to the consideration of a major leadership move for osteopathic medical education.

We would remain an osteopathic institution. We are not considering an MD option, as the Texas College of Osteopathic Medicine Board of Regents approved during the third week of November. We also are not considering giving applicants a choice of degree.

All student applicants to KCUMB’s College of Osteopathic Medicine would be applying for a dual degree, from a College of Osteopathic Medicine. But having that dual degree offers access by our students and graduates to programs currently or increasingly restricted to graduates of LCME accredited institutions.

These issues have been identified as of major concern by AACOM and other osteopathic institutions, as well as the AOA.

KCUMB, as you know, has worked continuously to build the quality of our programs and to keep a continuous strategic eye to the future.

It has been our practice to endeavor to have control over our future, and not wait for external circumstances to control us.

If you have questions or concerns, or wish to provide input, please let me know.

Once again, we are and always will be an osteopathic college of Medicine (KCUMB-COM) and our mission would not change. We are considering this opportunity in order to advance osteopathic medical education, and the opportunities to our students in the future.

That is our charge.

Best wishes for a wonderful holiday season!

Karen L. Pletz, J.D.
President and Chief Executive Officer
Kansas City University of Medicine and Biosciences
1750 Independence Ave.
Kansas City, MO 64106-1453
816-283-2301
816-283-2303 (fax)
[email protected]

Dr. Pletz is a hero in my book and it is a disgrace that she was sacked. Everything she wrote in that email above is true. She has correctly outlined key future issues that many in osteopathic medicine do not want discussed out in the open.
I have talked to several older osteopathic faculty members recently who have told me that with current and future school openings as well as increasing enrollments and the flat number of residency program positions we will see a situation in the future where the Carribean schools fold as their graduates can no longer match in siginificant numbers. They also forsee significant numbers of US osteopathic grads unable to get into residency slots starting in about 2020 as well. When I asked them what they planned to do about it they said they plan to do nothing since they were all going to be retired by 2020. So they basically told me that they don't give a darn about the problem. Here we have someone who is trying to look ahead (Dr. Pletz) and is willing to look at important issues and she gets fired. It is very sad to me to see people get slammed for bringing the truth out into the open.

Anyone who thinks that having twice as many osteopathic graduates (and rising) as the number of AOA osteopathic residency positions is a good thing is nuts IMHO. However the leadership of the AOA basically doesn't seem to give a hoot and they will let the bubble continue to grow until it bursts. They seem to think all the excess students will be soaked up by ACGME programs. However, about 20% of residency program directors are IMGs and there is nothing that requires them to give preference to US grads. There will be a lot of pain in the future before this is all sorted out.

 

[allopurinol]

I was a second year when Dr. Perrin was fired by the Board in 1996. Dr. Weaver (whose name is on the university auditorium) took over, just as his Son is now doing. We were all shocked and frankly scared at the time. Dr. Perrin even met with us off campus but couldn't say much because of legal issues. He was very liked by the students at the time. There were angry alumni who showed up for a Board meeting on campus later that year, but the board did what it wanted as they are doing now.

My class first met Dr Pletz at graduation because we were off on rotations when she started, but I have to say that I have been very impressed by the University's progress and improved image during her years of leadership.

I would just say to the students and applicants not to worry as this will pass. Work hard during your rotations/residency and you will succeed. Neither the AOA nor the KCUMB board can hold you back.

As a retina surgeon who completed an ACGME residency and fellowship, trust me when I say, you can do anything you want as long as you shine on your rotations/residency.

With all due respect, I have to disagree with the bolded part of your statment. The problem that new DO students are facing that you and I did not face is VSAS, which limits the visiting rotations DO students can do at allopathic residencies. Also, they are facing much competition for a fixed number of residency slots, while both allopathic and osteopathic class sizes are increasing every year. Some will not have to opportunity to shine on ACGME rotations, let alone residencies. As I mentioned in a previous post, my "DO-friendly" residency program is interviewing few DO students this year. Also, none of the visiting students to date have been DO students, and we have had quite a few. I believe they can do anything they want if given the opportunity; unfortunately, those opportunities are becoming very limited, and soon they will probably be non-existent.

 

[exPCM]

With all due respect, I have to disagree with the bolded part of your statment. The problem that new DO students are facing that you and I did not face is VSAS, which limits the visiting rotations DO students can do at allopathic residencies. Also, they are facing much competition for a fixed number of residency slots, while both allopathic and osteopathic class sizes are increasing every year. Some will not have to opportunity to shine on ACGME rotations, let alone residencies. As I mentioned in a previous post, my "DO-friendly" residency program is interviewing few DO students this year. Also, none of the visiting students to date have been DO students, and we have had quite a few. I believe they can do anything they want if given the opportunity; unfortunately, those opportunities are becoming very limited, and soon they will probably be non-existent.

Excellent post.

 

[UHS97]

With all due respect, I have to disagree with the bolded part of your statment. The problem that new DO students are facing that you and I did not face is VSAS, which limits the visiting rotations DO students can do at allopathic residencies. Also, they are facing much competition for a fixed number of residency slots, while both allopathic and osteopathic class sizes are increasing every year. Some will not have to opportunity to shine on ACGME rotations, let alone residencies. As I mentioned in a previous post, my "DO-friendly" residency program is interviewing few DO students this year. Also, none of the visiting students to date have been DO students, and we have had quite a few. I believe they can do anything they want if given the opportunity; unfortunately, those opportunities are becoming very limited, and soon they will probably be non-existent.

I don't mean to minimize the problems students are facing. My point was only that when I was a student there all those years ago, we were afraid the university might shut down after Dr Perrin was fired. Not only didn't that happen, but the university got a great new leader in Ms Pletz. Hopefully another strong leader will step up and continue to pursue the students' best interests going forward. No doubt these are stressful times for the students but they need to concentrate on what they can control, which is how hard they work at each and every level.

 

[IDBasco]

DMU is in the market for a new president. It would be interesting, to say the least, if Pletz ended up there.

 

[DO Anes]

Ms. Pletz quite correctly identified many of the problems currently facing osteopathic medicine. These problems are largely a result of irresponsibility on the part of COCA and the AOA to control school growth and assure proper clinical education at both the undergraduate and graduate levels.
Unfortunately, a dual DO/MD degree is an extraordinarily dangerous solution to these problems. The LCME is the only recognized accrediting body for schools in the US granting the MD degree, so to accomplish the dual degree the LCME accreditation is necessary. Many of our schools cannot pass this muster, so if KCUMB had succeeded, any school not doing so becomes immediately second-tier, as does any DO without a dual degree. From there it is but a short step to drop the DO entirely. Essentially the profession dies practically overnight. Having practiced osteopathic medicine for 20 years and seen the advantages it offers patients, the demise of this profession would be sad indeed.
So the board of KCUMB did what was necessary to prevent this and protect the profession, not necessarily what was in the best financial interest of their individual school; fratricide, if you will.
Hopefully this episode will serve as a wake-up call to correct the state of affairs that brought Pletz to make her decision, before the house of cards collapses. The AOA and COCA brought us to this point. It is time to clean this house.
George Mychaskiw II, DO, FAAP, FACOP
KCUMB, class of 1988
AOA Health Policy Fellow, class of 2007

 

[ncguy2005]

Ms. Pletz quite correctly identified many of the problems currently facing osteopathic medicine. These problems are largely a result of irresponsibility on the part of COCA and the AOA to control school growth and assure proper clinical education at both the undergraduate and graduate levels.
Unfortunately, a dual DO/MD degree is an extraordinarily dangerous solution to these problems. The LCME is the only recognized accrediting body for schools in the US granting the MD degree, so to accomplish the dual degree the LCME accreditation is necessary. Many of our schools cannot pass this muster, so if KCUMB had succeeded, any school not doing so becomes immediately second-tier, as does any DO without a dual degree. From there it is but a short step to drop the DO entirely. Essentially the profession dies practically overnight. Having practiced osteopathic medicine for 20 years and seen the advantages it offers patients, the demise of this profession would be sad indeed.
So the board of KCUMB did what was necessary to prevent this and protect the profession, not necessarily what was in the best financial interest of their individual school; fratricide, if you will.
Hopefully this episode will serve as a wake-up call to correct the state of affairs that brought Pletz to make her decision, before the house of cards collapses. The AOA and COCA brought us to this point. It is time to clean this house.
George Mychaskiw II, DO, FAAP, FACOP
KCUMB, class of 1988
AOA Health Policy Fellow, class of 2007

 

[Doctor Bob]

And then would any school that starts offering the dual degree offer some kind of bridge for alumni to get the dual degree as well? Because then unless they radically change their curriculum, alumni might start arguing "well we did the same courses so we ought to be able to get the extra degree".

Some school will come up with an online option for DO alumni to take online courses and get the extra didactic learning in a short time (say 6 months to a year) and then add MD to their name. I'd wager that the school would make a killing in tuiton fees.

 

[Instatewaiter]

This entire debate boils down to whether a person is interested in improving osteopathic education or if he clings to an antiquated, reactionary notion about what it means to be a DO.

The change will open up numerous opportunities for students including but not limited to more opportunities for away rotations, better prospects in the match and fellowship and being treated as an equal (which let's be honest, is far from universal). It will also force schools to adhere to a higher standard than they already do (namely the LCME's standards). For years I have heard my fellow medical students complain that their rotations were sub-par and forced them to travel across the country. COCA and the AOA did noting. The new for profit osteopathic school just shows how out of touch with its student base COCA and thr AOA actually are.

In addition to improving educational opportunities for students, the initiation of the dual degree will improve osteopathic education as a whole. This change will force schools to raise their standards and become LCME accredited or be seen as second tier. Can you honestly say this is a bad thing, to constantly be striving for improvement? Isn't that one of the core ideals of the profession? If a school currently could not live up to the LCME's standards and is doing nothing about it, the students are bearing the brunt for an institution'd laziness, greed, or inability to provide excellent education.

The detractors say that this will be the end of the DO identity. Unfortunately I have news for such people. 3he separate identity a myth. Instead it is a state of mind that has nothing to do with the degree and everything to do with a person's goals in treatment and pwrspective on intrractions with patients. So what the detractors have left is nothing more than than holding on to an antiquated idea for old times sake.

In reality the merging of the degrees means that Osteopathic training is now seen as essentiall on the same plane as the allopathic colleagues. This is a good thing and shows just how much the mainstram has come to accept DOs and how DO education has improved over the decades.

 

[tideleonheart]

Ms. Pletz quite correctly identified many of the problems currently facing osteopathic medicine. These problems are largely a result of irresponsibility on the part of COCA and the AOA to control school growth and assure proper clinical education at both the undergraduate and graduate levels.
Unfortunately, a dual DO/MD degree is an extraordinarily dangerous solution to these problems. The LCME is the only recognized accrediting body for schools in the US granting the MD degree, so to accomplish the dual degree the LCME accreditation is necessary. Many of our schools cannot pass this muster, so if KCUMB had succeeded, any school not doing so becomes immediately second-tier, as does any DO without a dual degree. From there it is but a short step to drop the DO entirely. Essentially the profession dies practically overnight. Having practiced osteopathic medicine for 20 years and seen the advantages it offers patients, the demise of this profession would be sad indeed.
So the board of KCUMB did what was necessary to prevent this and protect the profession, not necessarily what was in the best financial interest of their individual school; fratricide, if you will.
Hopefully this episode will serve as a wake-up call to correct the state of affairs that brought Pletz to make her decision, before the house of cards collapses. The AOA and COCA brought us to this point. It is time to clean this house.
George Mychaskiw II, DO, FAAP, FACOP
KCUMB, class of 1988
AOA Health Policy Fellow, class of 2007

I very much like your post and I think your heart is in the right spot: patients. In my honest opinion, I think that patients would benefit from the survival of this move to get LCME accreditation. Why?

1. LCME accreditation would impose stricter curriculum standards. This is NOT a bad thing! Sure, it would be bad for colleges without sufficient educational standards, but they would have to raise their standards - a good thing. And sure, it may be a bad thing for students in the bottom 10% of their class who are faced with more stuff to learn, but this is medical school and it is tough. We WANT smart, well-rounded students!!

2. Bringing osteopathy closer to MDs would not just eliminate some of the discrimination toward DOs, but it would also bring the beneficial aspects of OMM closer to MDs. Any DO out there who uses the phrase "keep us distinct from MDs," in my opinion is thinking in terms of maintaining tradition and not in terms of patient care. I have not experienced any special, colorful, magical "osteopathic/holistic princples" in my 2 years of education yet, and I don't foresee it. Moreover, if we became closer to MDs in nature and if manual medicine is as beneficial as the hardcore DOs make it out to be, we DOs should be thrilled to have MDs become closer to learning manual medicine or having a pathway to it! Patients > tradition.

Your fear is that a DO school gaining LCME accreditation would essentially destroy osteopathy overnight. I disagree. The US healthcare system would be greatly harmed without us and there would have to be a portal for existing DOs in the US to be grandfathered in. (ie taking some of the basic classes, taking USMLE for those that didn't, etc). If KCUMB became MD,DO and some other colleges followed suit, but others like RVU didn't follow suit... this would be a good thing. A little free market economics / survival of the fittest would be the greatest thing to insure osteopathy continuing. And yes you're right - something like this could lead to to the collapse of "DO" altogether.

Your worry is that if you destroy the letters "DO," you destroy all the benefits OMM brings to patients. As I said earlier, if OMM is as beneficial as it is claimed to be, then it will survive. A MD, DO (Doctor of Medicine, Diplomat of Osteopathy) would make OMM less exclusive and might give existing MD PCPs a way to gain a skill that could catch on and become standard of care. Without bridging the gap of DO-MD, the truly beneficial OMM techniques will never be standard of care.

 

[Doctor Bagel]

I agree with the 2 above posts. I'm not sure about the effects on osteopathic medicine, but I don't have a lot of respect for osteopathic schools that would claim they are simply unable to meet LCME requirements. Why not? To me, that implies that they believe their training/funding/setup is somehow inferior. And this gets back to the initial issue -- AOA/COCA requirements shouldn't be less strict than LCME requirements. If they weren't less strict, we wouldn't see new schools and offshoots opening up every day without strong funding and without any real plan to guarantee good clinical training for their students.

 

[JaggerPlate]

Can someone enlighten me a little bit about VSAS blocking of DO rotations, how many programs do this, the effect it has on DOs trying to match ACGME, and if it is an attempt to muscle DOs out of ACGME residencies??

 

[Laryngophed]

Can someone enlighten me a little bit about VSAS blocking of DO rotations, how many programs do this, the effect it has on DOs trying to match ACGME, and if it is an attempt to muscle DOs out of ACGME residencies??

I was wondering about this too, so I did a little search. My impression is that the allopathic schools are using VSAS like a mini-ERAS for fourth year visiting rotations. The problem is that you must be enrolled at an LCME accredited institution to use VSAS. The obvious mechanism for blocking osteopathic students is this preclusion, preventing osteopathic students from auditioning at these institutions.

VSAS link

 

[cyclohexanol]

Can someone enlighten me a little bit about VSAS blocking of DO rotations, how many programs do this, the effect it has on DOs trying to match ACGME, and if it is an attempt to muscle DOs out of ACGME residencies??

Quite a few institutions use VSAS, because it just makes it easier for them. I don't really buy into the idea of keeping DOs out of ACGME residencies, but who knows.

I haven't had any difficulties obtaining rotations at institutions which use VSAS. They had a way to get rotations before VSAS and have kept those mechanisms in place, at least for now.

 

[exPCM]

VSAS is being used by 64 LCME medical schools (and rising) http://www.aamc.org/programs/vsas/students/start.htm
This is the LCME response to the unparalleled growth of osteopathic schools - they are preserving rotation spots for the growing numbers of allopathic students. The inevitable result of this is that the rotation slots available at VSAS institutions for DO students will continue to dwindle as they are left with the decreasing crumbs remaining after the allopathic students have taken their fill.

 

[EM2BE]

In the midst of all this, you are all forgetting that if you want the MD title, you can go to the appropriate school to get it. No one ever said you had/have to go to an osteopathic school. It is/was your choice to get the DO title, therefore, you will deal with the complications that come with it. You know these complications before making your decision to apply so there is no excuse that it's something new (unless you are currently in school and have to deal with VSAS and didn't have the warning). Everything you do in life will affect you later on. You have to make the correct decision for yourself and deal with any consequences that come with it.

In addition, I know of several people that did not care for Pletz, or at least all the politics she brought to the school. I think the school may benefit from having someone other than a lawyer as president for a little while. I agree she did great things for the school, but the things she messed up have not mentioned in light of the fact that she was fired and everyone is trying to be nice.

 

[Bitsy]

In the midst of all this, you are all forgetting that if you want the MD title, you can go to the appropriate school to get it. No one ever said you had/have to go to an osteopathic school. It is/was your choice to get the DO title, therefore, you will deal with the complications that come with it. You know these complications before making your decision to apply so there is no excuse that it's something new (unless you are currently in school and have to deal with VSAS and didn't have the warning). Everything you do in life will affect you later on. You have to make the correct decision for yourself and deal with any consequences that come with it.

In addition, I know of several people that did not care for Pletz, or at least all the politics she brought to the school. I think the school may benefit from having someone other than a lawyer as president for a little while. I agree she did great things for the school, but the things she messed up have not mentioned in light of the fact that she was fired and everyone is trying to be nice.

I agree with EM2BE. Also, a 4th year KCUMB students. I do not think the MD, DO dual degree will do much to put DO students on par (at least in terms on discrimination) with MD students. There will simply be another tier, pretty much the same tier we were in before. There will be US MD students, then US DO students (or US DO students that got an MD degree on a technicality...the school is the same, we just will have a few more initials behind our name), then FMGs (Carribbean students have the MD degree and certainly don't get any extra boost from that). I know that some will say the LCME will force some DO schools to raise their standards in order to achieve the accreditation, which may or may not be true. With the established DO schools though, I do not feel there will be much change. I have not seen any extra attempt to improve our clinical education at KCUMB (despite trying to prepare for LCME accreditation). Rather, I have seen effort toward opening another branch campus rather than trying to improve on the main campus. I think our clinical rotations need some improvement. Some sites may be great, mine certainly was not. As students, we always are getting tons of e-mails about random art stuff that our school is sponsoring. While I think that is nice and all, when I had a problem with one of my evaluations and why I was never contacted, their excuse was that they don't have enough people to e-mail people about problems with their evaluations. My dean's letter was on hold and I had no clue about this and this was in October (one month before the MSPE was set to be released). I think getting student's evaluations correct and MSPEs in order is more important than a new auditorium and a new student center and library. I felt the school was starting to get more concerned with its outside appearance and branding (lots of affiliations with the arts in KC and appealing to applicants with artificial stuff) than actually improving the substance of our education. I hope this will change with a new president. I also had no problem with the VSAS. I went to top quality away rotations, but simply had to submit a paper application. Some places with DO biases are using VSAS to try and limit our away rotations there. This is the only benefit I can think of that LCME accreditation will afford us. There are allopathic medical schools and Carribbean schools if you really want the initials MD behind your name.