New Challenges and Opportunities • ACGME would begin accrediting the formerly AOA-accredited specialty of osteopathic neuromusculoskeletal medicine and establish a RC to oversee the process. • ACGME would create an application system for osteopathic recognition available to all ACGME-accredited residencies and fellowships interested in promoting the education of residents in Osteopathic Principles and Practice (OPP) and Osteopathic Manipulative Therapy (OMT). ACGME would also create an Osteopathic Recognition Committee to oversee this process. • ACGME senior leadership would include a senior vice president, osteopathic accreditation position to oversee all osteopathic GME. As was the case with the California Merger, osteopathic family physicians would be divided on the proposal to move to a Single Accreditation System. With the demise of the osteopathic hospital, the pace of developing AOA-certified residencies in allopathic hospitals lagged behind the pace of new graduates being produced by the many new colleges of osteopathic medicine, which were coming online at a rapid pace. These new colleges of osteopathic medicine depended heavily on ACGME-accredited residencies to take their graduates, especially in generalist specialties like family medicine, which were plentiful. A loss of the ACGME-accredited residency pathway would negatively affect the ability of many colleges of osteopathic medicine to place their graduates into postgraduate training programs. That would dramatically impact the college’s residency match rates, which would lead to noncompliance with accreditation requirements and the eventual loss of the school’s accreditation. For most of the colleges of osteopathic medicine, there appeared to be only one viable choice for their future graduates and that was to support the move toward a Single Accreditation System. Those opposed to a closer relationship with the allopathic profession, by ending AOA accreditation and joining the SAS, raised a very valid concern regarding loss of autonomy and pointed to homeopathy as an example. At one point in history, Samuel Hahnemann’s homeopathy was one of the most popular medical fields in the world with hospitals, as it was considered safer and less invasive than conventional medicine of the day. His science was first strongly opposed by organized medicine then later embraced by AMA, only to totally lose its autonomy as hospitals and postgraduate programs gradually converted to allopathic care. In truth, a number of original osteopathic residencies were lost as a result of the SAS and its requirements, and there needs to be more effort from the profession to choose ACGME-accredited programs that maintain osteopathic recognition. As Dr. de Regnier so aptly put it, “Only the future will determine if the Single Accreditation System was a good or bad move for the profession.” ACOFP and its members are doing everything they can to inspire DO students to choose affiliation with ACOFP and certify with the American Osteopathic Board of Family Practice thereby remaining lifelong members of ACOFP. Finally, we must always remember the wise counsel of George Northrup, DO, when writing about the California Merger: “The demise of the osteopathic profession will not occur unless its members actively participate in bringing about its demise.” ACOFP: OUR CONTINUING HISTORY 77
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjI2NjI=