首页> 外文期刊>Social science and medicine >Perceptions of philosophic and practice differences between US osteopathic physicians and their allopathic counterparts.
【24h】

Perceptions of philosophic and practice differences between US osteopathic physicians and their allopathic counterparts.

机译:美国整骨科医生与同种异体医生之间在哲学和实践上的差异。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Data were gathered through a random national mail survey of 3000 US osteopathic physicians. Nine hundred and fifty-five questionnaires were usable for analysis. Through open-ended questions, osteopathic physicians identified philosophic and practice differences that distinguished them from their allopathic counterparts, and whether they believed the use of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT), a key identifiable feature of the osteopathic profession, was appropriate in their specialty. Seventy-five percent of the respondents to the question regarding philosophic differences answered positively, and 41 percent of the follow-up responses indicated that holistic medicine was the most distinguishing characteristic of their profession. In response to the question on practice differences, 59 percent of the respondents believed they practiced differently from allopathic physicians, and 72 percent of the follow-up responses indicated that the osteopathic approach to treatment was a primary distinguishing feature, mainly incorporating the application of OMT, a caring doctor-patient relationship, and a hands-on style. More respondents who specialized in osteopathic manipulative medicine and family practice perceived differences between them and their allopathic counterparts than did other practitioners. Almost all respondents believed OMT was an efficacious treatment, but 19 percent of all respondents felt use of OMT was inappropriate in their specialty. Thirty-one percent of the pediatricians and 38 percent of the non-primary care specialists shared this view. Eighty-eight percent of the respondents had a self-identification as osteopathic physicians, but less than half felt their patients identified them as such. When responses are considered in the context of all survey respondents (versus only those who provided open-ended responses) not a single philosophic concept or resultant practice behavior had concurrence from more than a third of the respondents as distinguishing osteopathic from allopathic medicine. Rank and file osteopathic practitioners seem to be struggling for a legitimate professional identification. The outcome of this struggle is bound to have an impact on health care delivery in the US.
机译:数据是通过对3000名美国整骨科医生进行的全国性随机邮件调查收集的。共有955份问卷可供分析。通过不限成员名额的提问,整骨医师确定了区别于同种疗法同仁的哲学和实践差异,以及他们是否认为采用整骨疗法的主要可识别特征-整骨疗法(OMT)在他们的专业领域是否合适。在有关哲学差异的问题中,有75%的受访者回答是肯定的,而41%的后续回答表明,整体医学是其职业最鲜明的特征。在回答有关实践差异的问题时,有59%的受访者认为他们与同种疗法医生的做法有所不同,而72%的随访回应表明,骨病疗法是主要的区别特征,主要是结合了OMT的应用,亲切的医患关系和动手风格。与其他从业者相比,更多专注于整骨疗法和家庭实践的受访者认为他们与同种疗法的同伴之间存在差异。几乎所有受访者都认为OMT是一种有效的治疗方法,但是所有受访者中有19%认为在他们的专业领域中不适合使用OMT。 31%的儿科医生和38%的非初级保健专家对此表示赞同。 88%的受访者具有自我认同的骨病医师身份,但不到一半的人认为他们的患者认为自己是骨病医师。当在所有调查受访者(仅提供开放式答复的受访者)的背景下考虑答复时,没有超过三分之一的受访者同意单一的哲学概念或由此产生的实践行为来区分骨病疗法和同种疗法药物。等级整齐的整骨疗法医生似乎正在努力寻求合法的专业身份证明。这场斗争的结果必将对美国的医疗服务产生影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号