A National Evaluation of Scholarly Activity Requirement in Osteopathic EM Residency Programs: Survey of EM Program Directors.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the study were to determine the percentage of osteopathic emergency medicine (EM) residencies that require an original research project to meet the American Osteopathic Association requirement, describe the resources available to the residents and faculty members to complete their projects, and determine resident and faculty research productivity. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional online survey of program directors from osteopathic EM residency programs. Participants were asked about demographics and specifics related to their program's research curriculum, which included resources, outcomes, and challenges. RESULTS: The response rate was 48.21% (27/56) of program directors from EM residencies. The majority (82.77%) of respondents were from a community-based EM program, had a requirement that a research project be completed before graduation from residency (87.5%), and did not have a research associate program to assist in recruiting patients (83.33%). A physician research director was noted to lead the department in 53.57% of respondents, whereas 70.83% noted having a statistician on staff. A total of 2.91% of program faculty had received federal grant funding, and 13.88% had a research study indexed in PubMed. EM programs that had a physician-led research director were more likely to have core faculty with federal funding, articles indexed in PubMed, residents who submit their research for publication, and residents with competitive grants, as compared with programs without a research director. Program directors noted that analyzing data, designing a study, and generating a hypothesis were the biggest challenges to conducting research in the residency. CONCLUSIONS: Osteopathic EM residencies significantly differ from their allopathic counterparts in their research curriculum, capabilities, and outcomes.

The Jefferson Scale of Empathy: a nationwide study of measurement properties, underlying components, latent variable structure, and national norms in medical students.

The Jefferson Scale of Empathy (JSE) is a broadly used instrument developed to measure empathy in the context of health professions education and patient care. Evidence in support of psychometrics of the JSE has been reported in health professions students and practitioners with the exception of osteopathic medical students. This study was designed to examine measurement properties, underlying components, and latent variable structure of the JSE in a nationwide sample of first-year matriculants at U.S. colleges of osteopathic medicine, and to develop a national norm table for the assessment of JSE scores. A web-based survey was administered at the beginning of the 2017-2018 academic year which included the JSE, a scale to detect "good impression" responses, and demographic/background information. Usable surveys were received from 6009 students enrolled in 41 college campuses (median response rate = 92%). The JSE mean score and standard deviation for the sample were 116.54 and 10.85, respectively. Item-total score correlations were positive and statistically significant (p < 0.01), and Cronbach α = 0.82. Significant gender differences were observed on the JSE scores in favor of women. Also, significant differences were found on item scores between top and bottom third scorers on the JSE. Three factors of Perspective Taking, Compassionate Care, and Walking in Patient's Shoes emerged in an exploratory factor analysis by using half of the sample. Results of confirmatory factor analysis with another half of the sample confirmed the 3-factor model. We also developed a national norm table which is the first to assess students' JSE scores against national data.

Types and Distribution of Payments From Industry to Physicians in 2015.

IMPORTANCE: Given scrutiny over financial conflicts of interest in health care, it is important to understand the types and distribution of industry-related payments to physicians. OBJECTIVE: To determine the types and distribution of industry-related payments to physicians in 2015 and the association of physician specialty and sex with receipt of payments from industry. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Observational, retrospective, population-based study of licensed US physicians (per National Plan & Provider Enumeration System) linked to 2015 Open Payments reports of industry payments. A total of 933 295 allopathic and osteopathic physicians. Outcomes were compared across specialties (surgery, primary care, specialists, interventionalists) and between 620 166 male (66.4%) and 313 129 female (33.6%) physicians using regression models adjusting for geographic Medicare-spending region and sole proprietorship. EXPOSURES: Physician specialty and sex. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Reported physician payment from industry (including nature, number, and value), categorized as general payments (including consulting fees and food and beverage), ownership interests (including stock options, partnership shares), royalty or license payments, and research payments. Associations between physician characteristics and reported receipt of payment. RESULTS: In 2015, 449 864 of 933 295 physicians (133 842 [29.8%] women), representing approximately 48% of all US physicians were reported to have received $2.4 billion in industry payments, including approximately $1.8 billion for general payments, $544 million for ownership interests, and $75 million for research payments. Compared with 47.7% of primary care physicians (205 830 of 431 819), 61.0% of surgeons (110 604 of 181 372) were reported as receiving general payments (absolute difference, 13.3%; 95% CI, 13.1-13.6; odds ratio [OR], 1.72; P < .001). Surgeons had a mean per-physician reported payment value of $6879 (95% CI, $5895-$7862) vs $2227 (95% CI, $2141-$2314) among primary care physicians (absolute difference, $4651; 95% CI, $4014-$5288). After adjusting for geographic spending region and sole proprietorship, men within each specialty had a higher odds of receiving general payments than did women: surgery, 62.5% vs 56.5% (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.26-1.31); primary care, 50.9% vs 43.0% (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.36-1.39); specialists, 36.3% vs 33.4% (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.13-1.17); and interventionalists, 58.1% vs 40.7% (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.97-2.10; P < .001 for all tests). Similarly, men reportedly received more royalty or license payments than did women: surgery, 1.2% vs 0.03% (OR, 43.20; 95% CI, 25.02-74.57); primary care, 0.02% vs 0.002% (OR, 9.34; 95% CI, 4.11-21.23); specialists, 0.08% vs 0.01% (OR, 3.67; 95% CI, 1.71-7.89); and for interventionalists, 0.13% vs 0.04% (OR, 7.98; 95% CI, 2.87-22.19; P < .001 for all tests). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: According to data from 2015 Open Payments reports, 48% of physicians were reported to have received a total of $2.4 billion in industry-related payments, primarily general payments, with a higher likelihood and higher value of payments to physicians in surgical vs primary care specialties and to male vs female physicians.

Variations in Patterns of Utilization and Charges for the Care of Low Back Pain in North Carolina, 2000 to 2009: A Statewide Claims' Data Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to compare utilization and charges generated by medical doctors (MD), doctors of chiropractic (DC) and physical therapists (PT) by patterns of care for the treatment of low back pain in North Carolina. METHODS: This was an analysis of low-back-pain-related closed claim data from the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees from 2000 to 2009. Data were extracted from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina for the North Carolina State Health Plan using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision diagnostic codes for uncomplicated low back pain (ULBP) and complicated low back pain (CLBP). RESULTS: Care patterns with single-provider types and no referrals incurred the least charges on average for both ULBP and CLBP. When care did not include referral providers or services, for ULBP, MD and DC care was on average $465 less than MD and PT care. For CLBP, MD and DC care averaged $965 more than MD and PT care. However, when care involved referral providers or services, MD and DC care was on average $1600 less when compared to MD and PT care for ULBP and $1885 less for CLBP. Risk-adjusted charges (available 2006-2009) for patients in the middle quintile of risk were significantly less for DC care patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractic care alone or DC with MD care incurred appreciably fewer charges for ULBP than MD care with or without PT care. This finding was reversed for CLBP. Adjusted charges for both ULBP and CLBP patients were significantly lower for DC patients.

Variations in Patterns of Utilization and Charges for the Care of Headache in North Carolina, 2000-2009: A Statewide Claims' Data Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to compare patterns of utilization and charges generated by medical doctors (MDs), doctors of chiropractic (DCs), and physical therapists (PTs) for the treatment of headache in North Carolina. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of claims data from the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees from 2000 to 2009. Data were extracted from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina for the North Carolina State Health Plan using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, diagnostic codes for headache. The claims were separated by individual provider type, combination of provider types, and referral patterns. RESULTS: The majority of patients and claims were in the MD-only or MD plus referral patterns. Chiropractic patterns represented less than 10% of patients. Care patterns with single-provider types and no referrals incurred the least charges on average for headache. When care did not include referral providers or services, MD with DC care was generally less expensive than MD care with PT. However, when combined with referral care, MD care with PT was generally less expensive. Compared with MD-only care, risk-adjusted charges (available 2006-2009) for patients in the middle risk quintile were significantly less for DC-only care. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization and expenditures for headache treatment increased from 2000 to 2009 across all provider groups. MD care represented the majority of total allowed charges in this study. MD care and DC care, alone or in combination, were overall the least expensive patterns of headache care. Risk-adjusted charges were significantly less for DC-only care.

Variations in Patterns of Utilization and Charges for the Care of Neck Pain in North Carolina, 2000 to 2009: A Statewide Claims' Data Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to compare utilization and charges generated by medical doctors (MD), doctors of chiropractic (DC) and physical therapists (PT) by provider patterns of care for the treatment of neck pain in North Carolina. METHODS: This was an analysis of neck-pain-related closed claim data from the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees (NCSHP) from 2000 to 2009. Data were extracted from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina for the NCSHP using ICD-9 diagnostic codes for uncomplicated neck pain (UNP) and complicated neck pain (CNP). RESULTS: Care patterns with single-provider types and no referrals incurred the least average charges for both UNP and CNP. When care did not include referral providers or services, for either UNP or CNP, MD care with PT was generally less expensive than MD care with DC care. However, when care involved referral providers or services, MD and PT care was on average more expensive than MD and DC care for either UNP or CNP. Risk-adjusted charges for patients in the middle quintile of risk (available 2006-2009) were lower for chiropractic patients with or without medical care or referral care to other providers. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractic care alone or DC with MD care incurred appreciably fewer charges for UNP or CNP compared to MD care with or without PT care, when care included referral providers or services. This finding was reversed when care did not include referral providers or services. Risk-adjusted charges for UNP and CNP patients were lower for DC care patterns.

Role of Debt and Loan Forgiveness/Repayment Programs in Osteopathic Medical Graduates' Plans to Enter Primary Care.

CONTEXT: Osteopathic medicine emphasizes partnering with patients to help them attain or maintain health. This philosophy encourages physicians to practice primary care and a mission of improving community health. However, there is currently a shortage of primary care physicians in many areas of the United States. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether intended practice patterns of recent graduates of colleges of osteopathic medicine favor primary care and whether practice patterns correlate with medical education debt. METHODS: Responses were analyzed from the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine survey of pending medical school graduates from 2007 through 2016 regarding indebtedness and specialty selection. RESULTS: The percentage of graduating osteopathic medical students who chose a primary care specialty increased from 28.1% (676 students) in 2007 to 33.2% (1377 students) in 2016. Among graduates, those above the 75th percentile of debt had a general move toward more non-primary care positions, with a value of 74.4% in 2007 and 79.9% in 2016. Graduates below the 25th percentile had a gradual increase in primary care representation, moving from 24.6% in 2007 to 29.4% in 2016. In 2007, graduates with a loan forgiveness/repayment program were more likely to choose primary care over graduates without such a program (OR, 0.681 [95% CI, 0.505-0.920]; P=.02). Analysis of subsequent years showed a declining OR with increasing significance. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this analysis indicated that increased educational debt loan directly influenced physician practice choice. Graduates with high debt burden were more likely to enter primary care fields and use loan forgiveness/repayment programs. Graduates with high debt burden who did not use loan forgiveness/repayment programs were more likely to enter non-primary care specialty fields, with this trend increasing as mean medical school debt increased. This association has implications for policies that could affect choice of primary care. However, further research is needed to fully understand the primary care choice by graduates of colleges of osteopathic medicine.

US residency training before and after the 1997 Balanced Budget Act.

CONTEXT: Graduate medical education (GME) determines the size and characteristics of the future workforce. The 1997 Balanced Budget Act (BBA) limited Medicare funding for additional trainees in GME. There has been concern that because Medicare is the primary source of GME funding, the BBA would discourage growth in GME. OBJECTIVE: To examine the number of residents in training before and after the BBA, as well as more recent changes in GME by specialty, sex, and type and location of education. DESIGN: Descriptive study using the American Medical Association/Association of American Medical Colleges National GME Census on physicians in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited programs to examine changes in the number and characteristics of residents before and after the BBA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Differences in the number of physicians in ACGME-accredited training programs overall, by specialty, and by location and type of education. RESULTS: The number of residents and fellows changed little between academic year (AY) 1997 (n = 98,143) and AY 2002 (n = 98,258) but increased to 106,012 in AY 2007, a net increase of 7869 (8.0%) over the decade. The annual number of new entrants into GME increased by 7.6%, primarily because of increasing international medical graduates (IMGs). United States medical school graduates (MDs) comprised 44.0% of the overall growth from 2002 to 2007, followed by IMGs (39.2%) and osteopathic school graduates (18.8%). United States MD growth largely resulted from selection of specialties with longer training periods. From 2002 to 2007, US MDs training in primary care specialties decreased by 2641, while IMGs increased by 3286. However, increasing subspecialization rates led to fewer physicians entering generalist careers. CONCLUSION: After the 1997 BBA, there appears to have been a temporary halt in the growth of physicians training in ACGME programs; however, the number increased from 2002 to 2007.

Understanding ACGME Scholarly Activity Requirements for General Surgery Programs in the Era of Single Accreditation and the Next Accreditation System.

Becoming compliant with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirements for scholarly activity and remaining compliant over time requires time and attention to the development of an environment of inquiry, which is reflected in detailed documentation submitted in program applications and annual updates. Since the beginning of the next accreditation system, all ACGME programs have been required to submit evidence of scholarly activity of both residents and faculty on an annual basis. Since 2014, American Osteopathic Association-accredited programs have been able to apply for ACGME accreditation under the Single Graduate Medical Education Accreditation initiative. The Residency Program Director, Chair, Designated Institutional Official, Faculty, and coordinator need to work cohesively to ensure compliance with all program requirements, including scholarly activity in order for American Osteopathic Association-accredited programs to receive Initial ACGME Accreditation and for current ACGME-accredited programs to maintain accreditation. Fortunately, there are many ways to show the type of scholarly activity that is required for the training of surgeons. In this article, we will review the ACGME General Surgery Program Requirements and definitions of scholarly activity. We will also offer suggestions for how programs may show evidence of scholarly activity.

Difference in R01 Grant Funding Among Osteopathic and Allopathic Emergency Physicians over the Last Decade.

INTRODUCTION: Receiving an R01 grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is regarded as a major accomplishment for the physician researcher and can be used as a means of scholarly activity for core faculty in emergency medicine (EM). However, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires that a grant must be obtained for it to count towards a core faculty member's scholarly activity, while the American Osteopathic Association states that an application for a grant would qualify for scholarly activity whether it is received or not. The aim of the study was to determine if a medical degree disparity exists between those who successfully receive an EM R01 grant and those who do not, and to determine the publication characteristics of those recipients. METHODS: We queried the NIH RePORTER search engine for those physicians who received an R01 grant in EM. Degree designation was then determined for each grant recipient based on a web-based search involving the recipient's name and the location where the grant was awarded. The grant recipient was then queried through PubMed central for the total number of publications published in the decade prior to receiving the grant. RESULTS: We noted a total of 264 R01 grant recipients during the study period; of those who received the award, 78.03% were allopathic physicians. No osteopathic physician had received an R01 grant in EM over the past 10 years. Of those allopathic physicians who received the grant, 44.17% held a dual degree. Allopathic physicians had an average of 48.05 publications over the 10 years prior to grant receipt and those with a dual degree had 51.62 publications. CONCLUSION: Allopathic physicians comprise the majority of those who have received an R01 grant in EM over the last decade. These physicians typically have numerous prior publications and an advanced degree.

Examining Health Care Students' Attitudes toward E-Professionalism.

Objective. To compare pharmacy, osteopathic medicine, dental medicine, and physician assistant (PA) students' perceptions of e-professionalism. Methods. A 20-item questionnaire was developed and administered to four cohorts of health care professions students early in their first professional year. The questionnaire contained 16 scenarios in which a hypothetical health care student or professional shared information or content electronically and students were asked to indicate how much they agreed that the scenario represented professional behavior. Results. Ninety-four percent of students completed the questionnaire. More female students were in the pharmacy and PA cohorts. There were statistical differences in students' perceptions of e-professionalism in five of 16 scenarios. Specific differences were most often between the osteopathic medicine students and the other cohorts. Conclusions. The health care professions students surveyed had similar perceptions of e-professionalism. Of the four cohorts, osteopathic medicine students appeared less conservative in their approach to e-professionalism than the other cohorts.

Learning With Reflection: Practices in an Osteopathic Surgery Clinical Clerkship Through an Online Module.

CONTEXT: The value of reflective practices has gained momentum in osteopathic medical education. However, the use of reflective pedagogies has not been explored in the larger context of medical course delivery and design, to the authors' knowledge. OBJECTIVE: To determine the types of reflection demonstrated by osteopathic medical students on an online discussion board and to explore differences in discussion engagement caused by the use of a reflective learning self-assessment tool. METHODS: Using a mixed-method approach, reflection processes in an osteopathic surgery clinical clerkship online module were investigated in third-year osteopathic medical students. Discussion board messages were captured and coded. Both manual coding techniques and automated interrogation using NVivo9 (a computer program) for qualitative data were applied. Correlations of scores across 4 case-based discussion tasks and scores for self-reflection were computed as quantitative data. RESULTS: Twenty-eight students were included. Four main types of reflection (ie, content, contextual, dialogic, and personal) along with corresponding differentiated subthemes for each type of case-based discussion board group message were identified. Group collaboration revealed insights about the reflection process itself and also about the evidence of collective efforts, group engagements, and intragroup support among students. Student preparation revealed that students' metacognition was triggered when they judged their own contributions to group work. Challenges in completing readings and meeting deadlines were related to the students' long work hours. CONCLUSION: Reflective practices are essential to the practice of osteopathic medicine and medical education. Curricula can promote the development of reflective skills by integrating these deliberate practices in educational activities.

The economic burden of back pain in the UK.

This paper reports the results of a 'cost-of-illness' study of the socio-economic costs of back pain in the UK. It estimates the direct health care cost of back pain in 1998 to be pound1632 million. Approximately 35% of this cost relates to services provided in the private sector and thus is most likely paid for directly by patients and their families. With respect to the distribution of cost across different providers, 37% relates to care provided by physiotherapists and allied specialists, 31% is incurred in the hospital sector, 14% relates to primary care, 7% to medication, 6% to community care and 5% to radiology and imaging used for investigation purposes. However, the direct cost of back pain is insignificant compared to the cost of informal care and the production losses related to it, which total pound10668 million. Overall, back pain is one of the most costly conditions for which an economic analysis has been carried out in the UK and this is in line with findings in other countries. Further research is needed to establish the cost-effectiveness of alternative back pain treatments, so as to minimise cost and maximise the health benefit from the resources used in this area.

National study of the impact of managed care on osteopathic physicians.

The study reported here was designed to provide insight into the impact managed care has had on osteopathic physicians' ability to practice medicine, as well as data to substantiate the prevalence of the specific problems encountered by the 40,000 osteopathic physicians in the United States. New data on the extent to which osteopathic physicians use osteopathic manipulative treatment was also obtained, as a review of the literature revealed only two previous surveys on the use of osteopathic manipulative treatment. The American Osteopathic Association hired an independent research company to conduct the survey.

The osteopathic medicine game: new strategies for winning.

The recruitment and retention of osteopathic medical students by osteopathic medical institutions is arguably the most important priority facing the profession today. Residencies accredited by the Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education are now the major competitors for osteopathic medical students; osteopathic residency graduates are readily accepted at most hospitals; and osteopathic medical faculty are regularly appointed to university and government positions. As a result, many osteopathic medical institutions are having difficulty in filling their training programs and recruiting faculty and medical staff physicians. These recruitment problems can be resolved by the development of graduate medical education (GME) programs that are competitive with their allopathic GME counterparts, but hospitals and colleges must do so by developing a new approach to osteopathic GME. Osteopathic GME must sell academic quality by developing a university-like environment in the hospitals conducting training programs. Osteopathic training hospitals should consider requiring their directors of medical education to develop strategic plans for GME which result in the development of competitive programs.

Complexity of the healthcare crisis in rural America.

Because osteopathic physicians comprise 15.3% of all physicians in small rural counties, while making up only 5.1% of the nation's physicians, the solutions to the healthcare crisis for rural America are of special interest to them. The authors explore the incredible diversity of rural communities and the difficulty with defining the term "rural." They give the background of efforts to address rural health problems and the reasons accessible healthcare--available, acceptable and affordable--has been so elusive in rural settings. The authors also explain the relative success of the osteopathic medical profession and address the role osteopathic physicians can play in the future. Finally, they explore the exciting new possibilities that telemedicine offers.

Managed care: an opportunity for osteopathic physicians.

Managed care plans now enroll 38.6 million persons in the United States, and have increased their enrollment 14-fold in 5 years. The three major health reform proposals before Congress presently make managed care organizations, in one form or another, the linchpin of their reform plans. The authors trace the history of managed care leading to today's spectrum of plans from health maintenance organizations to preferred provider organizations with all their variants. They examine the government and insurance industry records of successes and failures and project the future for managed care with and without government-imposed healthcare reform. They unscramble the "alphabet soup" and detail the problems physicians have encountered in managed care settings. Given the key role of the primary care physician, the authors urge osteopathic physicians to take a proactive role in designing the shift to managed care. By supporting intelligent healthcare reform that brings physicians, hospitals, and insurers together in a practitioner-friendly system, the primary care physician can assume the leadership role in managed care and continue to serve as the patient advocate.

Medicaid reform: an opportunity for the osteopathic medical profession.

Established in 1965 to provide medical care for the impoverished, the Medicaid program has pitted state governments against the federal government, and made adversaries of the providers. The authors examine the legislative history of the program and the rapid growth of expenditures that have led states to cut benefits, tighten eligibility requirements, and slash payments to providers. The call for comprehensive healthcare reform and universal access put Medicaid at the forefront of proposed changes. The osteopathic medical profession, which already provides a quarter of the care in the program, has an opportunity to lead in innovation to promote program efficiencies, and to affirm the profession's commitment to serve vulnerable populations.