Practical Differences in Medicine

[subtle1epiphany]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I am seriously considering applying to Osteopathic schools, but while I have read a decent amount regarding their similarity to Allopathic physicians, I feel that I don't fully understand how they differ (apart from OMT/OMM and the degree itself).
I understand that the Osteopathic physician would view the disease or malady as secondary to the patient; regarding the situation as a patient with an illness, rather than the illness of/in the patient. However, in what tangible ways would this manifest itself in the treatment of the patient? For example, would an Osteopathic physician suggest lifestyle changes to a person with high blood pressure or cholesterol rather than prescribing beta blockers or statins? (this a "black or white" comparison, in reality I would imagine that the allopathic doctor would attempt both, but would the osteopathic doctor do differently?) 😕 😕 😕
I am in the process of preparing my AACOMAS personal statement, but I'm still trying to grasp the practical differences of the two schools of medicine. Also, regarding the statement, should it take a more "why I want to be a doctor" road, or a "why I want to be an Osteopathic doctor" path? Or would it really matter?

Any help would be great, TIA!! 😀

 

[Robz]

I am seriously considering applying to Osteopathic schools, but while I have read a decent amount regarding their similarity to Allopathic physicians, I feel that I don't fully understand how they differ (apart from OMT/OMM and the degree itself).

Well, I'll let you know I was in the same kind of boat last year. Shadowing really opened my eyes to a lot. I highly highly suggest it. (also helps with LORs too) What I found is that other than OMT and a general philosophy difference there isn't a lot of difference ....at all. We all practice medicine and the OMT is an extra 3 hours a week and another tool for you to use.

I understand that the Osteopathic physician would view the disease or malady as secondary to the patient; regarding the situation as a patient with an illness, rather than the illness of/in the patient. However, in what tangible ways would this manifest itself in the treatment of the patient? For example, would an Osteopathic physician suggest lifestyle changes to a person with high blood pressure or cholesterol rather than prescribing beta blockers or statins? (this a "black or white" comparison, in reality I would imagine that the allopathic doctor would attempt both, but would the osteopathic doctor do differently?) 😕 😕 😕

I like this quote "A DO treats the patient with a disease and a MD treats the disease in a patient". Its sutile but it works. In your experiement I would think a DO AND an MD would suggest lifestyle changes before they would turn to pharmalogical means for control. Check out Dean Ornish MD and his diet for another view point by an allopathic physician on that subject matter. Again....not really a lot of difference. You will find the major difference in the two types of physicians mainly in primary care and DO who specialize in OMT cause they can take the time to use it. Most of these DO that use are good with it as well which not ever DO is good with OMM.

I am in the process of preparing my AACOMAS personal statement, but I'm still trying to grasp the practical differences of the two schools of medicine. Also, regarding the statement, should it take a more "why I want to be a doctor" road, or a "why I want to be an Osteopathic doctor" path? Or would it really matter?

I'll tell you what....first, again I highly suggest a day shadowing...hell...do a half of a day. Then you'll have something to talk about in your interviews. Second, I litterally took my AMCAS essay...whittled it down to the 3000 or so characterists for the AACOMAS essay and put the word osteopathic infrom of medicine. Other than that it was a simple this is why I chose medicine and why I am passionate about it.

Any help would be great, TIA!! 😀

No prob....hope this helps....

 

[bgworm]

Just like Robz said, it's a bit different philosophy and approach to treatment. However, the DO degree is what you make of it, I have met DO's that treat patients in exctly the same way an MD would (never use OMM and don't use a holistic approach). I have also seen the ways in which they differ when it comes to palpating patients right away and not standing back with a clipboard taking notes and nodding. You can take the osteopathic philosophy and OMM treatment to heart and use these tools or you can put it on the sidelines and practice just like your allopathic counterparts. Just my two cents 😀 👍
As far as the PS goes, I did pretty much the same thing as Robz did, cut out some of the details in my AMCAS PS and pasted it into the smaller AACOMAS space adding a few "choice" words in places.

 

[ArmyDoc1999]

Hey, guys, hope you don't mind a current DO student putting in his two cents here. Everybody has been right on so far, I just wanted to add a few things.

1.) You will notice a difference in the way the two types of schools operate in addition to everything else. In my experience, DO students are more willing to help out each other, and help students in lower years as well. Fewer "gunners" in DO schools.

2.) DO's definitely haver a different approach to their patients. You'll almost NEVER hear a DO refer to a patient by his/her affliction. Example: I've got a GI Bleeder in exam 3. This is just to augment what was said earlier about seeing the disease secondary to the patient.

3.) Probably the biggest advantage I know of is this: Being a DO does NOT limit your residency options. In fact, the can be larger. I know a VERY successful DO psychiatrist who lectures at Harvard Med every year who did an MD residency. But do MD's do DO residencies? I've never heard of one. Osteopathic schools train you to do everything an MD does, but MD schools don't do the reverse. This may close off some oppertunities for MD students to crosstrain with DOs.

I hope this has helped with this issue a little bit. Let me know if I can be of any more help.

 

[N-toxicologist]

3.) Probably the biggest advantage I know of is this: Being a DO does NOT limit your residency options. In fact, the can be larger. I know a VERY successful DO psychiatrist who lectures at Harvard Med every year who did an MD residency. But do MD's do DO residencies? I've never heard of one. Osteopathic schools train you to do everything an MD does, but MD schools don't do the reverse. This may close off some oppertunities for MD students to crosstrain with DOs.

I hope this has helped with this issue a little bit. Let me know if I can be of any more help.

This comforts me. I honestly feel like I have DO mentality, but I really want to do Neurosurgery and research. Although this specialty doesn't utilize a DO training like something such as primary care would, I feel that if I have a certain attitude, it will come through in my practice. The only things keeping me from ONLY applying DO is:

1) the residency issue, which you've addressed

2) This limits my schools, as I need to stay in Texas.

Other than that, TCOM's DO/Ph.D is my first choice.

OP: The other posters have explained the differences pretty well, although it's hard to fully explain the intangible. If you think you may be a DO, you probably are, philosophically speaking. If the "prestige" of going allo doesn't weigh heavily with you, and you want a more laid-back atmosphere in which to learn, I suggest TCOM; the people here are great (I work in the research lab)

 

[ArmyDoc1999]

UNTlabrat,

TCOM is an EXCELLENT school, as I'm sure you already know based on your previous experience at UNT. I would encourage you to apply there if you feel you have the DO ethos, and good luck in what ever you decide to do!