Nasce uma nova especialidade : osteopatia

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Antônio Guimarães Da Silva
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Preventive Medicine ◽  
Rio De Janeiro ◽  
Obstetrics And Gynecology ◽  
Physical Medicine ◽  
National Board ◽  
Physical Medicine And Rehabilitation ◽  
Allergy And Immunology ◽  
Medical Examiners

Por circunstâncias relacionadas à minha titulação, acabei designado pela Universidade Castelo Branco do Rio de Janeiro (UCB) para avaliar uma parceria proposta pela Escola de Osteopatia de Madri (EOM). À época, em 1997, a EOM propunha que a UCB passasse a organizar academicamente os cursos de osteopatia que a referida Escola já vinha ministrando no Brasil, com vistas a, no futuro, torná-lo um curso de pós-graduação. Algumas viagens à Madri para observar a estrutura acadêmica e pedagógica da sede da EOM, condição imposta pela UCB para concretizar a parceria, me levaram a conhecer esta modalidade terapêutica, com resultados efetivamente comprovados através de trabalhos científicos.Realizadas as adaptações que se faziam necessárias, a UCB aprovou, em 2000, o curso de osteopatia, com uma carga horária de 1050 horas para a titulação de especialização acadêmica, nível Lato Sensu. A resolução do COFITO, que estabelece a osteopatia como uma especialidade da fisioterapia, levou-nos a propor ao CEPE da UCB uma complementação de 450 horas, alcançando, assim, as 1.500 horas, distribuídas ao longo de cinco anos, exigidas pela referida resolução do COFITO. A introdução desta técnica terapêutica no Brasil pela corrente Européia e a pronta intervenção do COFITO foram fatores decisivos para nos brindar com mais uma especialidade. Houvera sido a Osteopatia implantada no Brasil por influência da escola americana, talvez os rumos tomados fossem outros. Senão, vejamos. Nos EUA, a osteopatia é normalmente exercida pelo médico, que deve obter sua permissão através do National Board of Osteopatic Medical Examiners, e está dividida em Sociedades Osteopáticas que se distribuem por todas as modalidades médicas; a saber: Allergy and Immunology, Anesthesiology, Dermatology ,Emergency Medicine, Internal Medicine, Neurologists and Psychiatrists, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Occupational and Preventive Medicine, Ophthalmology and Otolaryngology, Orthopedics Pathology, Pediatrics Proctology, Radiology, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rheumatology Sports Surgery Medicine.Com o objetivo de incentivar as linhas de pesquisas na área da osteopatia, estará sendo criado, durante as III Jornadas Hispano-Lusas de Fisioterapia em Terapia Manual (Sevilha-Espanha, 5 de outubro de 2001), o Centro Internacional de Pesquisas em Osteopatia. O referido Centro, dirigido por um fisioterapeuta brasileiro com Doutorado, terá sua sede na Espanha e manterá núcleos, vinculados a Universidades, na Argentina, no Brasil, na Itália, em Portugal e na Venezuela. Esperamos, desta forma, ao lado do reconhecimento profissional já oferecido pela resolução COFITO, dar mais um passo na consolidação acadêmica da nossa mais nova modalidade terapêutica.

scholarly journals Acceptance and Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Among Medical Specialists: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phanupong Phutrakool ◽  
Krit Pongpirul
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Alternative Medicine ◽  
Obstetrics And Gynecology ◽  
Physical Medicine ◽  
Medical Specialists ◽  
Physical Medicine And Rehabilitation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Neurological Surgery

Abstract BackgroundComplementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) has gained popularity among the general population but its acceptance and use among medical specialists have been inconclusive.MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed and Scopus databases for the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists. Each article was assessed by two screeners. Only survey studies relevant to the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists were reviewed. The pooled prevalence estimates were calculated using random-effects meta-analyses.ResultsOf 5,628 articles published between 2002 and 2017, 25 fulfilled the selection criteria. Ten medical specialties were included: Internal Medicine (11 studies), Pediatrics (6 studies), Obstetrics and Gynecology (6 studies), Anesthesiology (4 studies), Surgery (3 studies), Family Medicine (3 studies), Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (3 studies), Psychiatry and Neurology (2 studies), Otolaryngology (1 study), and Neurological Surgery (1 study). The overall acceptance of CAM was 52% (95%CI: 42-62%). Family Medicine reported the highest acceptance (67%; 95%CI: 60-73%), followed by Psychiatry and Neurology (64%; 95%CI: 35-85%), Neurological Surgery (63%; 95%CI: 43-79%), Obstetrics and Gynecology (62%; 95%CI: 36-82%), Pediatrics (60%; 95%CI: 41-77%), Anesthesiology (52%; 95%CI: 45-58%), Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (51%; 95%CI: 42-61%), Internal Medicine (41%; 95%CI: 39-43%), and Surgery (26%; 95%CI: 22-30%). The overall use of CAM was 45% (95% CI: 37-54%). The highest use of CAM was by the Obstetrics and Gynecology (68%; 95%CI: 63-73%), followed by Family Medicine (63%; 95%CI: 58-68%), Psychiatry and Neurology (55%; 95%CI: 35-73%), Pediatrics (44%; 95%CI: 42-46%), Otolaryngology (43%; 95%CI: 30-57%), Anesthesiology (42%; 95%CI: 37-47%), Internal Medicine (38%; 95%CI: 36-41%), Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (32%; 95%CI: 24-41%), and Surgery (25%; 95%CI: 22-29%). Based on the studies, meta-regression showed no statistically significant difference across geographic regions, economic levels of the country, or sampling methods.ConclusionAcceptance and use of CAM were moderate and varied across medical specialists.Systematic review registrationThis systematic review has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019125628) and the protocol can be accessed at http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42019125628.

scholarly journals Acceptance and use of complementary and alternative medicine among medical specialists: a 15-year systematic review and data synthesis

2022 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Phanupong Phutrakool ◽  
Krit Pongpirul
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Alternative Medicine ◽  
Complementary And Alternative Medicine ◽  
Obstetrics And Gynecology ◽  
Physical Medicine ◽  
Medical Specialists ◽  
Physical Medicine And Rehabilitation ◽  
Neurological Surgery

Abstract Background Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) has gained popularity among the general population, but its acceptance and use among medical specialists have been inconclusive. This systematic review aimed to identify relevant studies and synthesize survey data on the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists. Methods We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed and Scopus databases for the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists. Each article was assessed by two screeners. Only survey studies relevant to the acceptance and use of CAM among medical specialists were reviewed. The pooled prevalence estimates were calculated using random-effects meta-analyses. This review followed both PRISMA and SWiM guidelines. Results Of 5628 articles published between 2002 and 2017, 25 fulfilled the selection criteria. Ten medical specialties were included: Internal Medicine (11 studies), Pediatrics (6 studies), Obstetrics and Gynecology (6 studies), Anesthesiology (4 studies), Surgery (3 studies), Family Medicine (3 studies), Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (3 studies), Psychiatry and Neurology (2 studies), Otolaryngology (1 study), and Neurological Surgery (1 study). The overall acceptance of CAM was 52% (95%CI, 42–62%). Family Medicine reported the highest acceptance, followed by Psychiatry and Neurology, Neurological Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatrics, Anesthesiology, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Internal Medicine, and Surgery. The overall use of CAM was 45% (95% CI, 37–54%). The highest use of CAM was by the Obstetrics and Gynecology, followed by Family Medicine, Psychiatry and Neurology, Pediatrics, Otolaryngology, Anesthesiology, Internal Medicine, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, and Surgery. Based on the studies, meta-regression showed no statistically significant difference across geographic regions, economic levels of the country, or sampling methods. Conclusion Acceptance and use of CAM varied across medical specialists. CAM was accepted and used the most by Family Medicine but the least by Surgery. Findings from this systematic review could be useful for strategic harmonization of CAM and conventional medicine practice. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019125628 Graphical abstract

scholarly journals The Italian Survey on Cardiac Rehabilitation - 2008 (ISYDE-2008). Part 3. National availability and organization of cardiac rehabilitation facilities. Official report of the Italian Association for Cardiovascular Prevention, Rehabilitation and Epidemiolog

2016 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Tramarin ◽  
Marco Ambrosetti ◽  
Stefania De Feo ◽  
Massimo Piepoli ◽  
Carmine Riccio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Secondary Prevention ◽  
Cardiac Rehabilitation ◽  
Cardiovascular Prevention ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Day Hospital ◽  
Physical Medicine ◽  
Italian Association ◽  
Physical Medicine And Rehabilitation

From January 28th to February 10th 2008, the Italian Association for Cardiovascular Prevention, Rehabilitation and Epidemiology (IACPR-GICR) conducted the ISYDE- 2008 study, the primary aim of which was to take a detailed snapshot of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) provision in Italy – in terms of number and distribution of facilities, staffing levels, organization and setting – and compare the actual CR provision with the recommendations of national guidelines for CR and secondary prevention. The secondary aim was to describe the patient population currently being referred to CR and the components of the programs offered. Out of 190 cardiac rehabilitation centers existing in Italy in 2008, 165 (87%) took part in the study. On a national basis, there is one CR unit every 299,977 inhabitants: in northern Italy there is one CR unit every 263,578 inhabitants, while in central and southern Italy there is one every 384,034 and 434,170 inhabitants, respectively. The majority of CR units are located in public hospitals (59%), the remainder in privately owned health care organizations (41%). Fifty-nine percent are located in hospitals providing both acute and rehabilitation care, 32% are in specifically dedicated rehabilitation structures, while 8% operate in the context of residential long term care for chronic conditions. Almost three-quarters of CR units currently operating are linked to dedicated cardiology divisions (74%), 5% are linked to physical medicine and rehabilitation divisions, 2% to internal medicine, and 19% to cardiac surgery and other divisions. Inhospital care is provided by 62.4% of the centers; outpatient care is provided on a day-hospital basis by 10.9% of facilities and on an ambulatory basis by 20%. The CR units are led in 86% of cases by a cardiologist and in only 14% of cases by specialists in internal medicine, geriatrics, physical medicine and rehabilitation, pneumology or other disciplines. In terms of staffing, each cardiac rehabilitation unit has 4.0±2.7 dedicated physicians (range 1-16, mode 2), 10.1±8.0 nurses, 3.3±2.5 physiotherapists (range 0 – 20; 16% of services have no physiotherapist in the rehabilitation team), 1.5±0.8 psychologists, and a dietitian (present in 62% of CR units). Phase II CR programs are available in 67.9% of cases in residential (inpatient) and in 30.9% of cases in outpatient (day-hospital and ambulatory) settings. Phase III programs are offered by 56.4% of the centers in ambulatory outpatient regime, and on an at home basis by 4.8% with telecare supervision, 7.3% without. Long term secondary prevention follow up programs are provided by 42.4% of CR services.

Performance on the Obstetrics and Gynecology National Board of Medical Examiners Subject Exam

2016 ◽  
Vol 128 ◽  
pp. 57S
Author(s):  
Belinda M. Kohl-Thomas ◽  
Kelly A. Ray ◽  
Thomas J. Kuehl ◽  
Steven R. Allen
Keyword(s):  
Obstetrics And Gynecology ◽  
National Board ◽  
Medical Examiners

Predictors of Residency Performance: A Follow-up Study

1997 ◽  
Vol 116 (6) ◽  
pp. 647-651 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen H. Calhoun ◽  
James A. Hokanson ◽  
Byron J. Bailey
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Academic Achievement ◽  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Medical School ◽  
The Other ◽  
Physical Medicine ◽  
Follow Up Study ◽  
History Of

In a 1990 study we investigated resident applicant characteristics associated with successful matching into otolaryngology. 1 Of the 175 applicants studied, 87 matched, for a 49.7% success rate. Successful matching was much more likely for applicants with a history of excellent academic achievement in medical school. Of the 88 applicants who did not match during the year that was originally studied, 30 matched to otolaryngology in subsequent years. Of the 58 who never matched in otolaryngology, there is no evidence of board certification for 30. Of the other 28, 12 are board certified in anesthesia; 3 in radiology; 2 each in family medicine, internal medicine, general surgery, psychiatry, and physical medicine, and rehabilitation; and 1 each in pathology, emergency medicine, and dermatology. Of the total of 117 who matched in otolaryngology, 109 began residency training, and 107 finished otolaryngology training. Program directors answered questionnaires about 100 of 107 of these residents, detailing aspects of residency performance. The only correlation found between a highly satisfactory residency performance and characteristics that could be evaluated at the time of interviewing for residency positions was with excellent academic performance in medical school.

An analysis of part II of the national board of medical examiners test with regard to questions in emergency medicine

1986 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-15
Author(s):  
Arthur B Sanders ◽  
William P Burdick ◽  
Thomas O Stair ◽  
Donald Witzke
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
National Board ◽  
Medical Examiners

scholarly journals Using a Simulated Surgical Skills Station to Assess Laceration Management by Surgical and Nonsurgical Residents

2011 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 326-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew V Fargo ◽  
John A Edwards ◽  
Bernard J Roth ◽  
Matthew W Short
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Surgical Skills ◽  
Obstetrics And Gynecology ◽  
Medical Specialties ◽  
Surgical Residents ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Age Range ◽  
Surgical Group

Abstract Objective To assess laceration management performance among surgical and nonsurgical postgraduate year-1 (PGY-1) residents objectively and to test for interval improvement. Methods From 2006 to 2008, 106 PGY-1 residents from 10 medical specialties were evaluated with a simulated surgical skills station using pigs' feet before and after internship. Subjects were given 11 minutes to choose the proper suture, prepare and close the wound, and answer laceration management questions. Trainees were classified as surgical (emergency medicine, general surgery, obstetrics and gynecology, orthopedics, and otolaryngology) and nonsurgical (family medicine, internal medicine, neurology, pediatrics, and transitional year). An objective checklist was used to assess performance. Results A total of 106 PGY-1 residents (age range, 25–44 years; mean, 28.7 years) participated, consisting of 41 surgical (39%) and 65 nonsurgical residents (61%). Surgical group scores improved from 78.4% to 87.7% (P < .001). Nonsurgical scores improved from 67.2% to 73.1% (P < .001). There was similar improvement between groups (surgical, 9.4%; nonsurgical, 5.9%; P  =  .21). Surgical residents outscored nonsurgical residents before (P < .001) and after (P < .001) internship. Conclusion Surgical residents outperformed nonsurgical residents before and after the PGY-1 year with similar score improvements. A simulated surgical skills station can be used to evaluate procedure performance objectively and to test for interval improvement. A simulated surgical skills station may serve as a useful adjunct to apprenticeship in assessing procedure competence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document