J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1991 Sep; 14(7): 422-7.

Osteopathic vs. chiropractic education: a student perspective.

McNamee KP, Magarian K, Phillips RB, Greenman PE.

Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, Research Division, Whittier, CA 90609-1166.

This study compares nationwide survey results from 506 second year students of 11 osteopathic schools and 881 students from the first and second academic year (third term/fourth quarter) of eight chiropractic colleges. Each student was given a questionnaire regarding his/her perspective on the education he/she was receiving. Both populations were questioned about whether or not they came from an osteopathic/chiropractic family, their application process, the efficacy of osteopathic manipulative therapy (OMT)/chiropractic adjustments, their first year attitude concerning the efficacy of OMT/chiropractic adjustments, the integration of osteopathic/chiropractic principles into the curriculum and the justification for separate health care professions. Osteopathic and chiropractic students entered their respective professions from nonosteopathic/non-chiropractic families. Although both populations selected their profession as a first and primary choice, chiropractic students were more substantially represented. Upon entering their program, osteopathic students were not convinced, but had an open mind concerning the effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative therapy (OMT), and were divided as to whether there is enough of a distinction between DOs and MDs to justify separate professions. Chiropractic students, on the other hand, entered their program convinced that chiropractic adjustments are effective, and saw a clear distinction between the roles of chiropractic physicians and medical doctors.