FutureOrtho2024
Full Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2020
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 4
My first organ based system involved 4 days of studying physiology at the level of detail of Gutton Hall, one day on EKGs, three weeks of pathology with mixed in pharmacology and histology/microbiology, and a 5th week of pure review. My school recommends Gutton Hall and the many of the powerpoints pull from that source and the even more in depth Boron & Boulpeep. Zero slides from Costanzo.
We jumped thru 200 pages of physiology in 4 days, then a day on EKG then 3 weeks from the Lilly pathophysiology of heart disease (no vascular content), then had a single day spent on pharmacology and a half day on histology and micro. I feel like I never got a solid basis on how the heart and vascular system works in a normal person, so I have to use Lilly to infer normal function from a book focused on pathology.
Would it be more educational and I learn more if I deviated from the school's structure and instead studied physiology for 2 weeks, then a day on histology, a day on microbiology, 2 weeks on pathology, and a couple of days at the end on pharmacology? I can't go back in time and go in what seems to me a more logical sequence of topics within my first organ based system, but I can apply this sequence in all future organ based systems. I've heard students at my school study dual curriculums - one to make grades to do well on school written shelf exams, and another to really learn the material for the USMLE step 1, so there is a hint to do what I am thinking.
Also, did anyone seem to get more out of reading the best books and studying powerpoints than listening to lectures when you had not had time to read the book before the lecture, or does everyone watch all lectures regardless out of fear of something being clarified as being on a test? I got fooled in a recent exam where the powerpoint suggested a test question required us to know the exact efficacy of a class of drugs for that organ system, but then the exam did not ask that level of question and focused more on the bigger picture of what drug treatments work and their mechanisms, rather than detailed statistics comparing for example the different amounts that statins lower LDLs (30-60%, 40-60%, etc.).
Any and all help is greatly appreciated. I'm feel like I'm being forced to memorize a bunch of facts that sometimes don't even appear on the tests, rather than actually learning the true content of how the organ works, how histology looks, what pathologic conditions can occur, and how each condition can be treated by different drugs.
We jumped thru 200 pages of physiology in 4 days, then a day on EKG then 3 weeks from the Lilly pathophysiology of heart disease (no vascular content), then had a single day spent on pharmacology and a half day on histology and micro. I feel like I never got a solid basis on how the heart and vascular system works in a normal person, so I have to use Lilly to infer normal function from a book focused on pathology.
Would it be more educational and I learn more if I deviated from the school's structure and instead studied physiology for 2 weeks, then a day on histology, a day on microbiology, 2 weeks on pathology, and a couple of days at the end on pharmacology? I can't go back in time and go in what seems to me a more logical sequence of topics within my first organ based system, but I can apply this sequence in all future organ based systems. I've heard students at my school study dual curriculums - one to make grades to do well on school written shelf exams, and another to really learn the material for the USMLE step 1, so there is a hint to do what I am thinking.
Also, did anyone seem to get more out of reading the best books and studying powerpoints than listening to lectures when you had not had time to read the book before the lecture, or does everyone watch all lectures regardless out of fear of something being clarified as being on a test? I got fooled in a recent exam where the powerpoint suggested a test question required us to know the exact efficacy of a class of drugs for that organ system, but then the exam did not ask that level of question and focused more on the bigger picture of what drug treatments work and their mechanisms, rather than detailed statistics comparing for example the different amounts that statins lower LDLs (30-60%, 40-60%, etc.).
Any and all help is greatly appreciated. I'm feel like I'm being forced to memorize a bunch of facts that sometimes don't even appear on the tests, rather than actually learning the true content of how the organ works, how histology looks, what pathologic conditions can occur, and how each condition can be treated by different drugs.