Question for DOs

[Behcet]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Just out of curiosity, i had a question: if osteopathic medicine is supposed to be holistic medicine, how come so many DOs want to specialize? shouldn't you stick with primary care, since that's supposed to be the mission of osteopathic medicine? do any of you feel that there's a conflict there in the ideology of a DO degree and the use of the degree to go into very specific subspecialties? i just wanted to get a feel for some of the opinions out there

 

[gas-x]

i think all this holistic stuff is just an attempt to make a selling point. without this idea, DOs don't have enough reason to justify that they are different. it's an attempt to advertise and appeal to the general public who we are. without it, the public has no reason to pick a DO instead of an MD.

as far as specialties, DOs are so mainstream right now you can't tell anything apart. medicine is all the same, no matter who is practicing it. the quality of DO students have improved drastically that residency programs tend to be more receptive. that is what is opening doors...the hard work of students, not the "holistic" approach to patient care.

while i'm draining someone's gluteal abscess in the ER, i usually like to use my holistic ideology and ask a patient what is forcing him to sit on his ass all day and not take better care of himself. that's as far as my holistic attitude goes 😀

 

[Behcet]

gas-x, thanks for the honest answer 🙂 i still want to hear more opnions about the initial topic, but you also bring up another point - should DO schools even exist? should they be converted to MD schools and be made to follow the same standards, since, as many DOs point out, there is not much practical difference in the 2?

 

[p-bo]

Why can't a DO be a pulmonologist, nephrologist, anesthesiologist (fill in any specialty) and practice holistic medicine? FYI.. you don't have to be a primary care provider to take a holistic approach to patient care. also, MDs recieve training in holistic medicine.... they just call it the bio-psycho-social model of medicine.

Don't forget that DOs also are trained in manual medicine, though many choose not to practice manipulation. DOs do have a separate identity, although often blurred on this website.

 

[OldManDave]

Originally posted by Behcet
gas-x, thanks for the honest answer 🙂 i still want to hear more opnions about the initial topic, but you also bring up another point - should DO schools even exist? should they be converted to MD schools and be made to follow the same standards, since, as many DOs point out, there is not much practical difference in the 2?

First of all, DO schools are held to the same standards or DOs would not have full practice authority in this country.

Regarding, "should they exist or just convert to MD schools?" To be honest, I think that they should begin MD/DO degrees. Offer to those who are admitted the MD only or the MD/DO track. For those doing MD only -- same education you have received. For those choosing MD/DO, add in the manip med and viola!

 

[Behcet]

p-bo and oldmandave (especially p-bo)...it seems to me that it's DOs that blur the line between themselves and MDs, which begs the question i've been curious about - should there even be DO schools? y not just convert them all to MD schools, and similar to what oldmandave suggested, allow some schools to add manual medicine to their curriculum if they'd like, but otherwise function under the ACGME and meet the same requirements as MD programs. i think it'd be better for all parties involved, especially the DOs who always have to fight the stigma of not being an MD. any thoughts? should we do away with DO schools entirely?

 

[Purifyer]

Originally posted by OldManDave
First of all, DO schools are held to the same standards or DOs would not have full practice authority in this country.

Regarding, "should they exist or just convert to MD schools?" To be honest, I think that they should begin MD/DO degrees. Offer to those who are admitted the MD only or the MD/DO track. For those doing MD only -- same education you have received. For those choosing MD/DO, add in the manip med and viola!

Do you really think a MD/DO degree is necessary for an MD to practice manip med? Why not just a 6 month/1 year post grad diploma in manipulative medicine?

 

[womansurg]

Originally posted by Purifyer
Do you really think a MD/DO degree is necessary for an MD to practice manip med? Why not just a 6 month/1 year post grad diploma in manipulative medicine?

From what I understand, six months or a year would be vast overkill compared to the current OMM exposures received. I'm told that the OMM constitutes just a few classes - a tiny fraction of the 4 year curriculum. At least, that was the word when people criticized OMM. Now that holistic approach is so mainstream, it's more common that DOs tout their OMM exposure rather than minimize it. Maybe it's different now?

 

[DermRes]

I think it is unfair to say that if you are a DO, you need to go into primary care, otherwise there is no reason why DO schools should exist. For many of us, when we decided to go into DO schools, we do not know enough about what being a doctor is all about. Personally, I know I want to be a doctor. But at the time of medical school application, "doctors" seems to be such a homogenous group. It is not until my 3rd year I really get a feel what being a doctor is all about.

When I was applying for medical school, I agreed with the philosphy of osteopathic medicine. I believed OMM would be a valuable tool. But I did not realize that I don't want to go into primary care when I was applying to medical school. It was not until the 3rd year when I gained enough exposure to make this decision.

I still believe in the ostopathic philosophy, and I still believe OMM would be a valuable tool... but not for me. I am gratefule of the profession which allow to me to be a doctor. I will continue to support it, even if I don't practice OMM. I think the osteopathic philsophy not only makes fine primary care physians, it also makes fine specialists.

 

[patrickhenson]

Originally posted by womansurg
From what I understand, six months or a year would be vast overkill compared to the current OMM exposures received. I'm told that the OMM constitutes just a few classes - a tiny fraction of the 4 year curriculum. At least, that was the word when people criticized OMM. Now that holistic approach is so mainstream, it's more common that DOs tout their OMM exposure rather than minimize it. Maybe it's different now?

OMM is a required course every semester for the first two years. A required rotation is also part of the curriculum. I would say that OMM is 20-25% of our basic sciences. With the courses, we also receive our early clinical experience, which is invaluable. I think that if you look at the advantages (clinical from day 1, extra knowledge, extra 'tools') versus the disadvantages (none), it really isn't much of a battle. While I may not agree with everything told to me in OCS class, I also had plenty of issues with topics presented in my BioChem text 😱 😱

As far as holistic medicine, I view ostopathy as a multi-dimensional approach to diagnosis and treatment, whereas much of medicine has been dominated by a linear outlook for a long time (i.e. treatment of symptoms, lack of causative exploration).

Also, what is this nonsense about just combining the degree? I think D.O.'s would have more of an issue with this than the M.D.'s would, because we already learn EVERYTHING that is required of an M.D. AND MORE. We would not be so willing to sacrifice our differences to gain more acceptance. It will come in due time. 😀

Not really a lecture, just adding my two cents

Patrick
OSU-COM