Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) training during residency is essential for development of these unique skills and principles as we go out into our future careers. One of the challenges that we have faced over the course of our residency tenure is having on-hand and online OMT resources to further promote learning and retention of knowledge and skills. The purpose of this research project was to gauge the family medicine residents’ OMT fundamental knowledge while also providing a designated preceptor area location for OMT resources for quick access, when needed, during our OMT clinic. At the same time, the residents were also lectured on common musculoskeletal dysfunctions and simple techniques that could be used for quick treatment options during clinic. First, the family medicine residents were first given a 10 question OMT pre-survey (five questions were knowledge based and five questions were short answer) to gauge their baseline fundamental osteopathic clinical knowledge and their knowledge about the pre-existing OMT resources and their locations in our clinic. After the residents completed the OMT pre-survey, the new OMT resources were placed in the new location in our precepting area and then two weeks later the residents were given a lecture about the fundamentals and common contraindications of OMT and the basic approaches to treatment of some routine chronic conditions, including low back pain, neck pain, headaches, and migraines. Also, included at then end of the lecture was the newly acquired OMT resources, including books and online website links, that were compiled for the clinic, and the new designated spot for these materials making them easily accessible during our OMT clinics. The OMT post survey, using the same one as above, was then done by the residents to see the impact on their OMT fundamentals and OMT resource knowledge. The Results from the pre and post surveys were then compared, and the data was graphed accordingly to show the changes. Questions one through five were graded on having “correct” vs “incorrect” answers, and the short answer questions (6-10) were graded on the premise of “positive” vs “negative” answers. Answers were considered positive if they were optimistic, which includes the response “yes”, accurate location in the precepting area, any form of OMT resource, or any amount of time spent in learning, review, or preparations of OMT material for OMT clinics. Answers were considered negative if they were the opposite of the above description. The first eight questions showed a strong positive increase/improvement in the residents’ OMT knowledge and showed that they know the new resources and their location in the clinic, which was the purpose of our project. The last two questions had slightly different outcomes than expected which was addressed if similar research is done in the future.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ETSU/oai:dc.etsu.edu:asrf-2069 |
| Date | 25 April 2023 |
| Creators | Lucas, Logan E, Saval, Mike, Brummel, Mark |
| Publisher | Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University |
| Source Sets | East Tennessee State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Source | Appalachian Student Research Forum |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds