Volume 126, Issue 4

This article examines the sentiments of a Phoenix-area hospitalist who feels underpaid despite earning an objectively high salary. While physician compensation in the United States, including that of hospitalists (around $365,000 in Phoenix), ranks among the highest globally and places them in the top income percentiles domestically, the perception of being “underpaid” persists. The piece argues this feeling is a complex value judgment, influenced by the immense effort, sacrifice, and societal contribution inherent in the profession, often perceived as inadequately reflected by market-driven compensation. Cognitive biases, such as the Intrinsic Worth Fallacy and Social Comparison Bias, further shape this perception. Systemic healthcare issues, including administrative burdens and professional disempowerment, also contribute, leading to dissatisfaction where salary becomes a primary, yet seemingly insufficient, metric of worth. The article concludes that true professional value transcends monetary figures, calling for systemic changes to better acknowledge and support physicians, ensuring their profound contributions are recognized beyond financial metrics.

Context In an era in which clinical research plays a crucial role in advancing medical knowledge and contributing to the resume of medical students attempting to match into a residency, the creation of sustainable and effective research opportunities within medical education is paramount. Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (COMs) face unique challenges in creating these opportunities in a scalable and cost-efficient manner. Without these opportunities, osteopathic medical students may find themselves at a disadvantage compared to their allopathic counterparts in residency placements and academic career paths. Objectives We have created a template for providing perpetual, streamlined, scalable, cost-effective clinical research at our institution, and we believe that it can be implemented at other COMs. This abstract describes our research template and its outcomes. Methods Our template for creating clinical research opportunities has been in operation for the past 3 years. All of our studies are structured as retrospective analyses of data obtained from the electronic medical records of patients admitted to the hospital over a specific time frame. Initially, a broad-based research proposal is submitted to the hospital Institutional Review Board (IRB) on a particular topic. From this, multiple initial IRB research projects are generated. First- and second-year medical students go through a standardized application and onboarding process prior to participation in research. Students are then subdivided into research groups of four students each. Each research group is assigned a research topic and a faculty mentor who will help them navigate through the research project. Results Since 2022, a total of 295 medical students have participated in clinical research through this model, supported by 11 faculty research mentors. Across four completed research cycles, 64 projects have been conducted, resulting in 62 poster presentations (97 %), 15 peer-reviewed publications (23 %), and 6 additional manuscripts (9 %) currently under review. Conclusions Clinical research opportunities at COMs are needed now more than ever before. Over the past 3 years, our clinical research template has been proven to provide perpetual, streamlined, scalable, cost-effective clinical research. We believe that our template can be utilized to provide increased clinical research opportunities at other COMs.

Context Dermatology remains one of the most competitive medical specialties, with successful candidates often demonstrating outstanding academic performance, extensive research experience, and strong letters of recommendation. The integration of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) into a single accreditation system in 2020 was intended to streamline residency training, but it has raised concerns about how Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (DO) applicants will perform in dermatology residency match. Objectives This study examines the differences in DO and MD match rates following the single graduate medical education (GME) accreditation system, focusing on the match performance of DO dermatology applicants. It also analyzes the match rates of DO students into traditional ACGME (formerly allopathic)- and former AOA-accredited programs. Methods A retrospective review of National Residency Matching Program (NRMP) annual reports and the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) statistics was conducted for dermatology applicants from 2020 to 2024. Data were analyzed to compare the number of DO and MD applicants and their match rates to traditional ACGME (former allopathic)-accredited and former AOA-accredited programs. Data on the degree types of current residents at all ACGME-accredited residency programs were collected and analyzed. Statistical analyses included chi-square testing and bootstrapping for categorical variables and proportions. Results The study included 137 ACGME-accredited dermatology programs, with 26 (18.98 %) having previously received AOA accreditation. The analysis found that there were substantial discrepancies in postgraduate year 2 (PGY-2) match rates (p<0.05) between 2020 and 2024, with DO applicants matching at a lower rate. Furthermore, more DO applicants consistently matched into former AOA-accredited programs than into ACGME-accredited programs. Matched MD candidates outperformed matched DO applicants in terms of United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 scores (p=0.002) and research production (p=0.001). Conclusions In summary, DO applicants continue to have lower match rates in dermatology than MD applicants, with fewer DOs matching into traditional (formerly allopathic) ACGME-accredited programs. There are several reasons for this disparity. Systemic changes and further studies are needed to improve the success rates of DO dermatology applicants in future application cycles.

Context Evidence supports osteopathic manipulative medicine (OMM) as an effective manual therapy, although it remains underutilized by Doctors of Osteopathic Medicine (DOs). Objectives Understanding barriers preventing the broader adoption of OMM is essential to expanding access to it as a noninvasive treatment option. We set out to survey both DOs and non-DO clinicians to identify perceived barriers to OMM. Methods Survey items were adapted from prior studies utilizing an iterative refinement process that included cycles of pilot testing with revisions. Participants were recruited internally from Mayo Clinic Midwest – a large, multistate, healthcare system in the Midwest region of the United States – utilizing internal email. Participants were given a descriptive survey that was developed with support from the Mayo Clinic Survey Research Center. Results The survey was sent out to a total of 952 individuals, including 184 DOs and 768 non-DO clinicians (MD, Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery [MBBS], nurse practitioners, and physician assistants). Respondents included 76 DOs (41.3 % response rate) and 91 non-DOs (11.8 % response rate). Of the 76 DO respondents, 21 (27.6 %) reported utilizing OMM clinically. Commonly reported barriers include time limitations, poor public perception, and lack of training in residency, and time is allocated to other professional interests. Conclusions Within a large health system that includes primary care and specialty care, few DOs practice OMM, citing time constraints, lack of residency training, and competing professional interests as primary barriers. These challenges might successfully be addressed through targeted osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) education in residency programs, enhanced compensation, and improved referral pathways.

Context Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) has been shown to improve athletic performance by enhancing shoulder range of motion, flexibility, and balance in various sports. However, its effects on sprint performance, particularly in competitive environments, remain understudied. Sprinting is a high-intensity activity that depends on anaerobic capacity, neuromuscular efficiency, and volume of oxygen (VO2) max. Although OMT has demonstrated potential in enhancing muscle function, its acute impact on 60-m sprint performance has not been established. Objectives This randomized controlled study, approved by the Rocky Vista University Institutional Review Board (IRB), aimed to evaluate whether OMT could improve 60-m sprint times in competitive athletes and explore its potential integration into sideline protocols. Methods Participants were 31 young adults recruited from the community. After providing informed consent, participants completed a standardized 10-min dynamic warm-up, followed by their first timed 60-m sprint trial. Participants were then randomized into two groups: a treatment group receiving a 5-min lower-extremity OMT protocol administered by an osteopathic physician, and a control group receiving 5 min of sham therapeutic ultrasound (STU). A second 60-m sprint was performed under identical conditions to the first trial. Sprint times were measured individually to ensure consistency. Results Statistical analysis revealed modest improvements in sprint times within both groups. The treatment group showed a mean improvement of 0.0693 s, while the control group demonstrated a 0.0275 s improvement. Further paired t -test analyses showed that the results were not significant. Conclusions Although these improvements were not statistically significant, they indicate a slight trend favoring OMT. Between-group analysis did not reveal significant differences (p=0.477), suggesting that the observed changes were comparable across groups. Although OMT produced slight improvements in sprint performance, these changes were not statistically significant. This suggests that OMT may not yield immediate measurable benefits for 60-m sprint times in young adults. However, the observed trend warrants further investigation. Future studies with larger sample sizes, varied athletic populations, and alternative treatment protocols may help clarify the acute effects of OMT on sprint performance. These findings contribute to the growing body of research on OMT and raise new questions regarding its potential role in enhancing performance in athletic activities.

Context Healthcare inequities disproportionately affect underprivileged groups, leading to negative health outcomes. Challenges are compounded in regions like Appalachian Ohio, where rurality and poverty exacerbate issues such as access to care and environmental stressors, significantly impacting conditions like asthma. In severe cases of asthma, sinus surgery is sometimes indicated, because it has been shown to improve asthma-related symptoms. However, the specialists who perform these procedures, such as otolaryngologists, may be less available to certain underprivileged groups. Objectives The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of social determinants of health on the prevalence and treatment of asthma in Appalachian vs. non-Appalachian regions of Ohio, and how those factors affect the rate at which sinus surgery is performed in different populations. Methods This cross-sectional study utilized public data gathered in the year 2021 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to compare asthma prevalence, emergency visit and hospitalization rates, sinus surgery frequencies, and social determinants of health in Appalachian vs. non-Appalachian regions. Results Both the average prevalence rate of asthma (p<0.001) and the number of emergency department visits as a complication of asthma (p<0.01) in Appalachian Ohio counties were significantly higher than non-Appalachian counties. Interestingly, the ratio between sinus surgery prevalence and the number of procedures was not statistically different between Appalachian and non-Appalachian counties. This included balloon sinuplasty (p=0.4), septoplasty (p=0.4), and functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS, p=0.4). Additionally, several social determinants of health, specifically the poverty rate ( r =0.9, p<0.001), uninsured rate ( r =0.4, p<0.001), unemployment rate ( r =0.5, p<0.001), and housing burden rate ( r =0.6, p<0.001) were shown to have a significant correlation with the rate of asthma prevalence among adults in Ohio. Conclusions Asthma prevalence and treatment availability differ significantly between Appalachian and non-Appalachian regions of Ohio, highlighting the need to improve access to specialists and address barriers to care in rural populations.