The AAO Journal, 2014/11, 24(3):18, type of study: ,css,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Free full text   (https://www.academyofosteopathy.org/aaoj)

Keywords:

osteopathic education [65]
osteopathic medicine [2109]
cadaveric dissection [1]
clinical osteopathic practice [2]
anatomy lab [2]
Arizona [5]
cross sectional study [894]
USA [1752]

Abstract:

Introduction: The purpose of this 2-year study was to develop a structured and effective means to integrate osteopathic principles into the basic science anatomy course. The foundation of the osteopathic medical profession is a strong anatomical understanding as it relates to disease and health. It was upon this foundation that osteopathic manipulative medicine (OMM) pearls were developed through the collaboration of OMM and anatomy faculty at the Midwestern University/Arizona College of Osteopathic Medicine (MWU/ AZCOM). Each OMM pearl is either a clinical osteopathic technique or a principle related to a specific area of dissection. The pearls were presented to first-year medical students at MWU/ AZCOM through various media, including dissection binders, introductory lab presentations, and the college’s online lecture database (Blackboard), and through personal instruction by the OMM Scholars, the undergraduate teaching fellows at MWU/ AZCOM. Methods: During the first year of this study, the OMM pearls were correlated to general regions of anatomical dissection, such as “the head and neck.” In the second year of this study, an OMM pearl was paired with each specific cadaveric dissection, such as the “suboccipital triangle.” After completing the course, students received a survey that consisted of several questions intended to ascertain the efficacy of the pearls based on the following: • clarity and appropriateness for students. • reinforcement of OMM concepts in the anatomy lab. • facilitation of recall of anatomical concepts during OMM. • integration of OMM Scholars as instructors of the pearls. Students answered the questions using a scale from 1 to 5, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Positive responses were 4 (agree) to 5 (strongly agree). Results: Greater than 51% of respondents to both surveys responded positively regarding clarity and appropriateness for students. Survey questions that assessed recall of anatomy and OMM generated positive responses from 59% and 63%, respectively, of those surveyed in the first year of the study, while in the second year of the study, the positive responses decreased to 45% and 32%, respectively. Greater than 53% of the respondents agreed that the Scholars were a positive influence in the anatomy lab. Conclusion: This study illustrated successful integration of osteopathic pearls in an anatomy course, and it highlighted areas of potential improvement. The results of this study indicate that collaboration between anatomy and OMM departments and integration of osteopathic principles are dynamic-yet-necessary processes. Although initially taught in conjunction with each other, basic sciences and osteopathic principles became separate disciplines as osteopathic medical education evolved. This study demonstrates a unique strategy to meld these inseparable fields of study.