Peters A S, Clark-Chiarelli N, Block S D
Department of Ambulatory Care and Prevention, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Helath Care, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 1999 Dec;14(12):730-9. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.03179.x.
To contrast prevailing behaviors and attitudes relative to prJgiary care education and practice in osteopathic and allopathic medical schools.
Descriptive study using confidential telephone interviews conducted in 1993-94. Analyses compared responses of osteopaths and allopaths, controlling for prJgiary care orientation.
United States academic health centers.
National stratified probability samples of first-year and fourth-year medical students, postgraduate year 2 residents, and clinical faculty in osteopathic and allopathic medical schools, a sample of allopathic deans, and a census of deans of osteopathic schools (n = 457 osteopaths; n = 2,045 allopaths).
Survey items assessed personal characteristics, students' reasons for entering medicine, learners' prJgiary care educational experiences, community support for prJgiary care, and attitudes toward the clinical and academic competence of prJgiary care physicians.
PrJgiary care physicians composed a larger fraction of the faculty in osteopathic schools than in allopathic schools. Members of the osteopathic community were significantly more likely than their allopathic peers to describe themselves as socioemotionally oriented rather than technoscientifically oriented. Osteopathic learners were more likely than allopathic learners to have educational experiences in prJgiary care venues and with prJgiary care faculty, and to receive encouragement from faculty, including specialists, to enter prJgiary care. Attitudes toward the clinical and academic competence of prJgiary care physicians were consistently negative in both communities. Differences between communities were sustained after controlling for prJgiary care orientation.
In comparison with allopathic schools, the cultural practices and educational structures in osteopathic medical schools better support the production of prJgiary care physicians. However, there is a lack of alignment between attitudes and practices in the osteopathic community.
对比整骨医学院和西医医学院在初级保健教育与实践方面的主流行为和态度。
1993 - 1994年进行的使用保密电话访谈的描述性研究。分析比较了整骨医生和西医医生的回答,并控制了初级保健倾向。
美国学术健康中心。
整骨医学院和西医医学院一年级和四年级医学生、二年级住院医师和临床教师的全国分层概率样本、西医医学院院长样本以及整骨医学院院长普查样本(n = 457名整骨医生;n = 2045名西医医生)。
调查项目评估个人特征、学生选择医学专业的原因、学习者的初级保健教育经历、社区对初级保健的支持以及对初级保健医生临床和学术能力的态度。
整骨医学院中初级保健医生在教师队伍中所占比例高于西医医学院。与西医同行相比,整骨医学界成员更有可能将自己描述为社会情感导向而非技术科学导向。整骨医学院的学习者比西医医学院的学习者更有可能在初级保健场所接受教育并与初级保健教师接触,并且更有可能得到包括专科医生在内的教师鼓励进入初级保健领域。两个群体对初级保健医生临床和学术能力的态度一直都是负面的。在控制了初级保健倾向后,两个群体之间的差异仍然存在。
与西医医学院相比,整骨医学院的文化实践和教育结构更有利于培养初级保健医生。然而,整骨医学界的态度和实践之间存在脱节。