Impact of the USMLE Step 1 and COMLEX Level 1 transition to Pass/Fail on osteopathic medical student stress levels and board preparation.

CONTEXT: The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 and Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Exam (COMLEX) Level 1 transitioned from a numeric scoring system to a Pass/Fail designation in 2022. This transition intended to decrease stress, improve medical student well-being, and encourage residency program directors to emphasize other aspects of residency applications. Pass/Fail score transitions in the undergraduate medical education curriculum have improved medical student psychological well-being and satisfaction; whether these same benefits translate to the board examination period is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study are to assess the impact of USMLE Step 1 and COMLEX Level 1 grade scale transition on medical student stress, wellness, board preparation decisions, and future residency selection processes. Investigators hypothesized that students under the Pass/Fail designation would experience less stress during the intensive study period leading up to USMLE Step 1 and COMLEX Level 1 and devote more time to other aspects of their residency applications. METHODS: To examine the impact on osteopathic medical student (OMS) stress and approach to board preparation, two surveys were administered to Rocky Vista University College of Osteopathic Medicine (RVU-COM) students before (Class of 2023) and after (Class of 2024) the transition to a Pass/Fail designation. All students within the RVU-COM Classes of 2023 and 2024 were invited to participate. The Cohen Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) was administered at the beginning of the focused board study period in May 2021 and 2022 to the Class of 2023 and 2024, respectively. The investigator-designed Licensing Exam Questionnaire (LEQ), meant to capture board preparation patterns, residency application perspectives, and wellness during examination preparation, was administered immediately after the board examination deadline in July 2021 and 2022 to the Class of 2023 and 2024, respectively. Statistical analysis included the use of independent t tests (numeric variables) and chi-square tests (categorical data). This project was considered exempt from full Institutional Review Board review. RESULTS: Approximately one-third of the Class of 2023 (PSS-10: n=86; LEQ: n=93) and 2024 (PSS-10=89; LEQ: n=92) responded. No difference was detected in mean PSS-10 score, 20.14 (SD=7.3) compared to 19.92 (SD=6.56) for the Class of 2023 and 2024 (p=0.84), respectively. The Class of 2023 reported more weeks studying (mean 6.27 weeks, SD=0.79) vs. the Class of 2024 (mean 5.44 weeks, SD=0.007), p<0.001, more practice examinations taken X 2 (1, n=182)=13.75, p<0.001, and a greater proportion scheduled examinations after June 20 X 2 (1, n=182)=29.01, p<0.001. No difference existed in hours studying per day, sequence of Step 1/Level 1, time between examinations, money spent, or type of study resources utilized. CONCLUSIONS: The transition of USMLE Step 1 and COMLEX Level 1 to a Pass/Fail designation did not reduce stress for OMSs at a single, multicampus COM. Respondents, however, altered board preparation practices in meaningful ways. As student behaviors and board-study patterns emerge, these insights must be connected to outcomes in the future.

The Predictive Value of the Residency AOBFP In-Service Exam, Produced and Administered by ACOFP.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Board certification is acknowledged as the mainstay for ensuring quality physician-delivered health care within medical specialties. The American College of Osteopathic Family Physicians (ACOFP) administers the American Osteopathic Board of Family Physicians' (AOBFP) In-Service Examination (ISE) to provide residents and program directors with a formative examination to assess competency and preparation for successful completion of the AOBFP certifying examination (CE). Unique assessment processes are integral to monitoring development of the osteopathic family physician throughout training and into practice, and to verify their competency for the safety and protection of the public. This study sought to investigate whether performance on the AOBFP ISE predicted performance on the AOBFP CE, and thereby successfully equipped residents to safely enter medical practice. METHODS: In 2020, data from 1,893 PGY-1 through PGY-3 residents (2016-2018), whose ISE scores could be matched with scores on the AOBFP initial board CE, were analyzed for this study. RESULTS: Correlations among ISE administrations across 3 years of postgraduate medical education were in the mid-to-high .6 range; the ISE scores correlated with CE scores in the mid .4 to high .5 range. Less reliable measures of positive predictive value were 0.99, and sensitivity was 0.91. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that ISE administrations during residency training are effective in developing remediation strategies for subsequent successful CE performance. The inclusion of osteopathic principles in the AOBFP CE necessitates inclusion of osteopathic content in resident training exams like ISE.

The AOA/ACGME Single Accreditation System and Its Immediate and Future Impact on Family Medicine.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The American Osteopathic Association (AOA) agreed to combine its graduate medical education programs with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) between July 1, 2015 and June 30, 2020 in an initiative called the Single Accreditation System (SAS). The objective of our study was to identify the impact the SAS had on the ACGME, family medicine (FM), and implications for the future of FM. METHODS: We collected and compiled data from the AOA, ACGME, and the National Residency Matching Program (NRMP). Analysis reveals the effects that the addition of former 122 AOA-accredited FM residencies had on the ACGME and FM programs. RESULTS: Several osteopathic FM programs encountered challenges meeting ACGME accreditation standards. As of June 1, 2020, 89 of 122 accreditation applications received initial or continuing accreditation; the others had accreditation issues to resolve. The Osteopathic Recognition program emphasizing training in osteopathic principles and practices was a popular option in FM residencies. Fewer DOs serve as program directors in former AOA-accredited FM residencies. CONCLUSIONS: The SAS has shifted the balance in the percentages of MDs, DOs, and international medical graduates (IMGs) in FM. Trends in FM show that as more DOs enter the NRMP the percent of MDs and IMGs decreases. In the future, it is projected that DOs will outnumber MDs and IMGs in ACGME FM residencies. The 51 new medical schools started between 2010 and 2020 will generate a test for the integration of their graduates into GME. Increased competition for FM residencies is expected.

Comparative Analysis of the American Board of Family Medicine and American College of Osteopathic Family Physicians In-Training Examinations.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Family medicine residency programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and the American Osteopathic Association typically require their residents to take the American Board of Family Medicine's In-Training Examination (ITE) and the American College of Osteopathic Family Physicians' In-Service Examination (ISE). With implementation of the single accreditation system (SAS), is it necessary to administer both examinations? This pilot study assessed whether the degree of similarity for the construct of family medicine knowledge and clinical decision making as measured by both exams is high enough to be considered equivalent and analyzed resident ability distribution on both exams. METHODS: A repeated measures design was used to determine how similar and how different the rankings of PGY-3s were with regard to their knowledge of family medicine as measured by the ISE and ITE. Eighteen third-year osteopathic residents participated in the analysis, and the response rate was 100%. RESULTS: The correlation between ISE and ITE rankings was moderately high and significantly different from zero (rs=.76, P<0.05). A Wilcoxon signed rank test indicated that the median ISE score of 62 was not statistically significantly different than the median ITE score of 71 (Z=-0.74, P=0.46, 2-tailed). CONCLUSIONS: The lack of a difference on statistical analysis of ISE scores and the ITE scores of the PGY-3 residents suggests that the cohort of osteopathic residents in family residency programs and the cohort of residents in ACGME-accredited programs seem to be of comparable ability, therefore there is no clear justification for administering both examinations.

Association Between Performance on COMLEX-USA and the American College of Osteopathic Family Physicians In-Service Examination.

BACKGROUND: The primary goal of residency programs is to select and educate qualified candidates to become competent physicians. Program directors often use performance on licensure examinations to evaluate the ability of candidates during the resident application process. The American College of Osteopathic Family Physicians (ACOFP) administers an in-service examination (ISE) to residents annually. There are few prior studies of the relationship between the Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination of the United States of America (COMLEX-USA) series and formative assessments of residents in training. OBJECTIVE: We explored the relationship between performance on COMLEX-USA and the ACOFP in-service examination to offer support on the use of licensing examinations in resident selection. METHODS: In 2016, performance data from the COMLEX-USA and the ISE were matched for 3 resident cohorts (2011-2013, inclusive; N = 1384). Correlations were calculated to examine the relationship between COMLEX-USA and ISE scores. Multiple linear regression models were used to determine if performance on COMLEX-USA significantly predicted third-year ISE (ISE-3) scores. RESULTS: Findings indicated that correlations among performance on COMLEX-USA and ISE were statistically significant (all P < .001), and there was strong intercorrelation between COMLEX-USA Level 3 and ISE-1 performance (r = 0.57, P < .001). Performance on the COMLEX-USA Levels 1 and 2-Cognitive Examination significantly predicted performance on the ISE-3 (F(2,1381) = 228.8, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The results support using COMLEX-USA as a part of resident selection in family medicine. Additionally, program directors may use performance on COMLEX-USA to predict success on the ISE-3.

Premedical anatomy experience and student performance in medical gross anatomy.

Gross anatomy is considered one of the most important basic science courses in medical education, yet few medical schools require its completion prior to matriculation. The effect of taking anatomy courses before entering medical school on performance in medical gross anatomy has been previously studied with inconsistent results. The effect of premedical anatomy coursework on performance in medical gross anatomy, overall medical school grade point average (GPA), and Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination Level 1 (COMLEX 1) score was evaluated in 456 first-year osteopathic medical students along with a survey on its perceived benefits on success in medical gross anatomy course. No significant differences were found in gross anatomy grade, GPA, or COMLEX 1 score between students with premedical anatomy coursework and those without. However, significant differences and higher scores were observed in students who had taken three or more undergraduate anatomy courses including at least one with cadaveric laboratory. There was significantly lower perceived benefit for academic success in the medical gross anatomy course (P<.001) from those students who had taken premedical anatomy courses (5.9 of 10) compared with those who had not (8.2 of 10). Results suggest that requiring any anatomy course as a prerequisite for medical school would not have significant effect on student performance in the medical gross anatomy course. However, requiring more specific anatomy coursework including taking three or more undergraduate anatomy courses, one with cadaveric laboratory component, may result in higher medical gross anatomy grades, medical school GPA, and COMLEX 1 scores. Clin. Anat. 30:303-311, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Comparison of Basic Science Knowledge Between DO and MD Students.

CONTEXT: With the coming single accreditation system for graduate medical education, medical educators may wonder whether knowledge in basic sciences is equivalent for osteopathic and allopathic medical students. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether medical students' basic science knowledge is the same among osteopathic and allopathic medical students. METHODS: A dataset of the Touro University College of Osteopathic Medicine-CA student records from the classes of 2013, 2014, and 2015 and the national cohort of National Board of Medical Examiners Comprehensive Basic Science Examination (NBME-CBSE) parameters for MD students were used. Models of the Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination-USA (COMLEX-USA) Level 1 scores were fit using linear and logistic regression. The models included variables used in both osteopathic and allopathic medical professions to predict COMLEX-USA outcomes, such as Medical College Admission Test biology scores, preclinical grade point average, number of undergraduate science units, and scores on the NBME-CBSE. Regression statistics were studied to compare the effectiveness of models that included or excluded NBME-CBSE scores at predicting COMLEX-USA Level 1 scores. Variance inflation factor was used to investigate multicollinearity. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to show the effectiveness of NBME-CBSE scores at predicting COMLEX-USA Level 1 pass/fail outcomes. A t test at 99% level was used to compare mean NBME-CBSE scores with the national cohort. RESULTS: A total of 390 student records were analyzed. Scores on the NBME-CBSE were found to be an effective predictor of COMLEX-USA Level 1 scores (P<.001). The pass/fail outcome on COMLEX-USA Level 1 was also well predicted by NBME-CBSE scores (P<.001). No significant difference was found in performance on the NBME-CBSE between osteopathic and allopathic medical students (P=.322). CONCLUSION: As an examination constructed to assess the basic science knowledge of allopathic medical students, the NBME-CBSE is effective at predicting performance on COMLEX-USA Level 1. In addition, osteopathic medical students performed the same as allopathic medical students on the NBME-CBSE. The results imply that the same basic science knowledge is expected for DO and MD students.

An interprofessional health assessment program in rural amateur sport.

Effective interprofessional learning (IPL) in multisectoral collaborations such as those linking health services within communities can provide an authentic experience for students and also appears to be the most effective way to achieve health changes in targeted population groups. The aim of this study was to facilitate the IPL of students at a rural university in a multisectoral health assessment programme and to promote health in players of rural amateur sport. Two rural rugby league teams took part in three pre-season health assessments conducted by general medical practitioners, practice nurses, and nursing, osteopathy, and exercise science students. The Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale questionnaire and a series of focus groups were used to evaluate participants' experiences of the programme. Results indicated that students saw the benefits for patients and 93% valued the opportunity to improve interprofessional communication, problem-solving and team skills. Some students felt they needed to learn more about their own professional role before learning about others, and instances of stereotyping were identified. The programme also enabled early detection of potential health risks and referral for medical care, management of musculoskeletal conditions, and health promotion. These health assessments would be readily transferred to other multisectoral sporting settings.

Osteopathic Physicians on the Editorial Boards of Major Medical Journals Over the Past 30 Years.

CONTEXT: With the recent merger of the American Osteopathic Association and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, new standards may be established for scholarly activity criteria and designation for each specialty. OBJECTIVE: To determine the percentage of osteopathic physicians on editorial boards in general and specialty medical journals and to compare the participation of osteopathic vs allopathic physicians and other health care researchers in editorial activities. METHODS: The number of osteopathic and allopathic physicians and other health care professionals serving as editor in chief, associate editor, editorial board member, emeritus editor, or in other editorial positions was examined in 8 major medical journals (New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA, Annals of Internal Medicine, Annals of Surgery, Annals of Emergency Medicine, Annals of Family Medicine, Obstetrics and Gynecology, and Pediatrics) published during the past 30 years. RESULTS: The number of editorial board positions increased during the past 30 years, with Annals of Surgery adding the most positions (64). When compared with allopathic physicians in all fields of medicine, the number of osteopathic physicians serving on an editorial board of a medical journal was significantly less (P<.001). When all editorial positions were combined, osteopathic physicians occupied 0.15% of all positions. CONCLUSION: A disparity exists between the numbers of osteopathic vs allopathic physicians in editorial positions in the core disciplines of medicine. Further investigation into the reasons why few osteopathic physicians serve in editorial roles is needed.

Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination-USA level 1 and level 2-cognitive evaluation preparation and outcomes.

The Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination-USA (COMLEX-USA) assesses the competence of osteopathic physicians in training. It is designed to protect the public by setting minimum competence standards. All osteopathic medical students must pass COMLEX-USA Level 1, Level 2-Cognitive Evaluation, and Level 2-Performance Evaluation before being allowed to graduate from an osteopathic medical school. Residency training programs use COMLEX-USA scores as a major factor in deciding whom they will interview and admit into their programs. In addition, colleges of osteopathic medicine use student COMLEX-USA scores as an external assessment of their success in educating students. Because COMLEX-USA is a high-stakes examination series, it is important to understand predictive factors for performance. The authors review the literature on the relationship between COMLEX-USA scores and correlated student variables. Results from the Council on Osteopathic Student Government Presidents' survey on students' preparation methods and performance are also provided.

New colleges of osteopathic medicine, branch campuses, and additional locations--what is the difference?

The American Osteopathic Association Commission on Osteopathic College Accreditation (AOA COCA) is recognized by the US Secretary of Education as the only accrediting agency for predoctoral osteopathic medical education. To maintain its recognition with the US Secretary of Education, the AOA COCA is required to adhere to all federal laws and regulations associated with recognition of accrediting agencies. In this article, the authors discuss the development of new colleges of osteopathic medicine (COMs). They also discuss the development of additional locations and branch campuses of existing COMs and compare the 2 processes. Also included is a review of the AOA COCA- approved class sizes of the accredited COMs.