Empathy and Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine: Is It All in the Hands?

A randomized, controlled study to assess if allopathic-osteopathic collaboration influences stereotypes, interprofessional readiness, and doctor-patient communication

Despite the growing similarities between allopathic (MD) and osteopathic (DO) medical education, few studies have examined allopathic-osteopathic collaboration. The following study focused on stereotypes and student readiness for interprofessional learning. Patient perceptions were also evaluated. Osteopathic and allopathic students were randomly allocated 1:1:1 to work in pairs (MD/DO, MD/MD, DO/DO) at the start of each shift. A questionnaire evaluating student communication was collected from patients at the end of each encounter. Surveys assessing stereotypes and interprofessional readiness were obtained from students at the end of each workday. Data collection was stopped early due to Coronavirus-related safety measures. In the ITT analysis, there were a total of 126 participants (57 students 69 patients). A per-protocol analysis was performed to account for repeat clinic volunteers. No significant differences were detected between student pairs; however, the sensitivity analysis of the questionnaire assessing interprofessional readiness was 8 points higher in the DO/DO group compared to the MD/MD and MD/DO groups (P = 0.0503). In the content analysis of qualitative responses, the MD/DO group was more likely to respond with themes of enjoyment and less concern about stereotypes than the DO/DO group. The MD/DO group was also less likely to report concerns about differences in expectations, methods, and thinking than the MD/MD group. Early trends from this study suggest that DO students may be better positioned to engage in interprofessional learning than their MD counterparts. Additionally, the findings from our content analysis provide evidence that the collaborative experience improved feelings associated with professional legitimacy and credibility among DO students. Taken in aggregate, this study provides justification for a follow-up investigation, as well as a framework for how such studies could best be executed in the future.

DERMS DO 5: A Proposed Curriculum for Dermatologic Training in 5 Osteopathic Competencies

Dermatology programs seeking osteopathic recognition under the new single graduate medical education (GME) accreditation system are required to demonstrate osteopathic competencies within their teaching curriculum. Although the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has put forth guidelines to obtain osteopathic recognition, ambiguity lingers regarding specialty-specific content that would fulfill these requirements. To date, there are no set curriculum guidelines addressing osteopathic principles within the field of dermatology. In this article, we review the existing literature surrounding key competencies and propose a dermatology-focused educational model, “DERMS (Direct, Empathy, Restore, Mobilize, Senses) DO 5,” to encourage the teaching of osteopathic competencies within GME training programs. Our proposed curriculum model addresses the 5 osteopathic care models and applications of osteopathic manipulative treatment within the realistic realm of dermatology.

2019 United States Osteopathic Medical Regulatory Summit: Consensus, Recommendations, and Next Steps in Defining Osteopathic Distinctiveness

Background

Osteopathic distinctiveness is a result of professional education, identity formation, training, credentialing, and qualifications. With the advancement of a single graduate medical education (GME) accreditation system and the continued growth of the osteopathic medical profession, osteopathic distinctiveness and professional identity are seen as lacking clarity and pose a challenge.

Summit

To achieve consensus on a succinct definition of osteopathic distinctiveness and to identify steps to more clearly define and advance that distinctiveness, particularly in professional self-regulation, a representative group of osteopathic medical students, residents, physicians, and members of the licensing, GME, and undergraduate medical education (UME) communities convened the 2019 United States Osteopathic Medical Regulatory Summit in February 2019. Key features of osteopathic distinctiveness were discussed. Growth in the profession; changes in health care delivery, technology, and demographics within the profession and patient communities; and associated challenges and opportunities for osteopathic medical practice and patients were considered.

Consensus

Osteopathic medicine is a distinctive practice that brings unique, added value to patients, the public, and the health care community at large. A universal definition and common understanding of that distinctiveness is lacking. Efforts to unify messaging that defines osteopathic distinctiveness, to align the distinctive elements of osteopathic medical education and professional self-regulation across a continuum, and to advance research on care and educational program outcomes are critical to the future of the osteopathic medical profession.

Recommendations

(1) Convene a task force of groups represented at the Summit to develop a succinct and consistent message defining osteopathic distinctiveness. (2) Demonstrate uniqueness of the profession through research demonstrating efficacy of care and patient outcomes, adding to the public good. (3) Harmonize GME and UME by beginning to align entrustable professional activities with UME milestones. (4) Convene representatives from osteopathic specialty colleges and certification boards to define curricular elements across GME, certification, and osteopathic continuous certification. (5) Build on the Project in Osteopathic Medical Education and Empathy study.

Does Empathy Decline in the Clinical Phase of Medical Education? A Nationwide, Multi-Institutional, Cross-Sectional Study of Students at DO-Granting Medical Schools

PURPOSE

To examine differences in students' empathy in different years of medical school in a nationwide study of students of U.S. DO-granting medical schools.

METHOD

Participants in this cross-sectional study included 10,751 students enrolled in 41 of 48 campuses of DO-granting medical schools in the United States (3,616 first-year, 2,764 second-year, 2,413 third-year, and 1,958 fourth-year students). They completed a web-based survey at the end of the 2017-2018 academic year that included the Jefferson Scale of Empathy and the Infrequency Scale of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire for measuring "good impression" response bias. Comparisons were made on empathy scores among students in different years of medical school using analysis of covariance, controlling for the effect of "good impression" response bias. Also, comparisons were made with preexisting data from students of U.S. MD-granting medical schools.

RESULTS

A statistically significant decline in empathy scores was observed when comparing students in the preclinical (years 1 and 2) and the clinical (years 3 and 4) phases of medical school (P < .001); however, the magnitude of the decline was negligible (effect size =0.13). Comparison of findings with MD students showed that while the pattern of empathy decline was similar, the magnitude of the decline was less pronounced in DO students.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in DO-granting and MD-granting medical education systems, such as emphasis on provision of holistic care, hands-on approaches to diagnosis and treatment, and patient-centered care, provide plausible explanations for disparity in the magnitude of empathy decline in DO compared with MD students. More research is needed to examine changes in empathy in longitudinal study and explore reasons for changes to avert erosion of empathy in medical school.

Empathy as related to gender, age, race and ethnicity, academic background and career interest: A nationwide study of osteopathic medical students in the United States

CONTEXT

Research on associations between medical student empathy and demographics, academic background and career interest is limited, lacks representative samples and suffers from single institutional features. This study was designed to fill the gap by examining associations between empathy in patient care, and gender, age, race and ethnicity, academic background and career interest in nationwide, multi-institutional samples of medical students in the United States and to provide more definitive answers regarding the aforementioned associations, with more confidence in the internal and external validity of the findings.

METHODS

Four nationwide samples participated in this study (n = 10 751). Samples 1, 2, 3 and 4 included 3616 first-year, 2764 second-year, 2413 third-year and 1958 fourth-year students who completed a web-based survey at the end of the 2017-2018 academic year. The survey included questions on demographics, academic background and career interest, the Jefferson Scale of Empathy, and the Infrequency Scale of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire to control for the effect of 'good impression' response bias.

RESULTS

Statistically significant and practically important associations were found between empathy scores and gender (in favour of women), race and ethnicity (in favour of African-American and Hispanic/Latino/Spanish), academic background (in favour of 'Social and Behavioural Sciences' and 'Arts and Humanities' in Samples 1 and 2) and career interest (in favour of 'People-Oriented' and 'Psychiatry' specialties).

CONCLUSIONS

Special features of this study (eg, nationwide representative samples, use of a validated instrument for measuring empathy in patient care, statistical control for the effect of 'good impression' response bias, and consistency of findings in different samples from multiple institutions) provide more definitive answers to the issue of correlates of empathy in medical students and increase our confidence in the validity, reliability and generalisability of the results. Findings have implications for career counselling and targeting students who need more guidance to enhance their empathic orientation.

Empathy in Medicine National Norms for the Jefferson Scale of Empathy: A Nationwide Project in Osteopathic Medical Education and Empathy (POMEE)

Context

National norms are necessary to assess individual scores from validated instruments. Before undertaking this study, no national norms were available on empathy scores. The Project in Osteopathic Medical Education and Empathy (POMEE) provided a unique opportunity to develop the first national norms for medical students.

Objective

To develop national norms for the assessments of osteopathic medical students' empathy scores on the broadly used and well-validated Jefferson Scale of Empathy (JSE) at all levels of osteopathic medical school education.

Methods

Participants were students from 41 of 48 participating campuses of osteopathic medical schools. Students were invited to complete a web-based survey, which included the JSE, in the 2017-2018 academic year.

Results

A total of 16,149 completed surveys were used to create national norm tables. Three national norm tables were developed for first-year matriculants and for students in preclinical (years 1 and 2) and clinical (years 3 and 4) phases of medical school. The norm tables allow any raw score on the JSE for male and female osteopathic medical students from matriculation to graduation to be converted to a percentile rank to assess an individual's score against national data.

Conclusions

National norms developed in this project, for men and women and at different levels of medical school education, can not only be used for the assessment of student's individual scores on the JSE, but can also serve as a supplementary measure for admissions to medical school and postgraduate medical education programs.