Ronan O'Brien

BSO launches 2 year post graduate MSc course to enable Doctors and Physiotherapists to become osteopaths

The BSO is launching a new 2 year post graduate MSc course for Doctors and physiotherapists to become osteopaths. It's due to launch in Spring 2012 and is subject to RQ status.

Personally I find it a remarkable (albeit unsurprising) move and struggle to see how it will benefit the profession. I can see how it would benefit the BSO's income but I'm not convinced it will benefit the profession as a whole, in fact it might undermine it. Perhaps I'm wrong and maybe other musers can enlighten me. Let me know your thoughts on this.

"In recent years, we have had an increasing number of applications for our programme from physiotherapists and medical practitioners who also wish to qualify as osteopaths. While we have been able to accredit prior learning in the past, we have now developed a programme designed specifically for this group.

Our new MSc Osteopathy (pre-registration)* for physiotherapists and medical practitioners is a two-year full time pre-qualifying programme designed to meet their needs. The course reflects the existing musculoskeletal knowledge and skills of the participants, building on this base to ensure that they achieve the competences required for independent osteopathic practice.

Graduating students can apply for registration with the General Osteopathic Council (GOsC) as an osteopath in the UK (subject to Recognised Qualification Status being granted by the Privy Council).

To apply for this programme you will need a suitable academic qualification (degree in physiotherapy or equivalent, or equivalent overseas qualifications, or degree in medicine). You will also need to provide evidence of recent experience in musculoskeletal care and be able to demonstrate your commitment to training as an osteopath."

Tags: BSO, british school of osteopathy, osteopathic education, osteopathy, physiotherapy, postgraduate, postgraduate education

Treatments: 3648

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

What was wrong with the old system?  Could somebody from the BSO explain?

Students feed off each other, it's part of the education.  So I would find it quite scary if professionals in another field were being fast-tracked through their own seperate stream.  I think that's bad for everybody.

On the other hand, if I could now do a medical degree in two years, that would be something worth considering...

Oh dear it will create the same dilemma as we currently have in France! The cold war between "real osteopath" and "physio-osteos". The Osteopath-Osteopaths believe that the Physio-Osteopaths are not real osteopath. However more people go to the Physio-osteo (or GP-osteo too in this case) because it it covered by national health.

We already have a difficulty to be a unit as a profession.Patient get confused with the differences in the ways of practice . This will make it even more confusing, and osteopathy might loose credibility from it.

I totally agree with Clotilde, don't follow France's model or it will utterly break the profession into pieces like what's happening now in France. I can assure you, it is in no one interests to let medics and physios becoming osteos in two years. I was a physio, did my 4 years full time  and physio/osteo and Medic/osteos I know don't match our qualification. (ESO)

If it were me I'd set a 5 year full time course to qualify as osteopath.

OMG, I know that osteopaths are (and should be) very proud of their profession but, looking from my point of view, why do you think physiotherapists are not good enough to become osteopaths? In my country one can enroll to osteopathy 'school' only being physio first. Is your anatomy and physiology different from others? Technical things have been taught on courses for years, the rest, for those who really want to graft an osteopathic philosophy into they practice, is only a matter of their attitude.And last but not least, perceiving physiotherapy to be inferior to osteopathy is merely misunderstanding resulting from ignorance:) IMHO, it can only enrich your practice.

Relax Raf, your jumping on this in a very personal way. This discussion is not about the pros and cons of physiotherapy (or osteopathy), it is about whether osteopathy can be taught in 2 years, and if it is in the professions interest to allow this.  

I have the same misgivings as Vincent and Cloilde. We are witnesses to a further fragmentation of osteopathic medicine in the UK, and we seem to be incapable of halting the rot. I suspect (without wishing to start an internecine collegiate bloodbath), that the BSO are acting out of self-interest and to increase its student numbers.

There are fewer and fewer individuals willing to commit to osteopathy as we are fast losing our identity as an autonomous healthcare group. The regulator has to take its (lion's) share of the blame for this, but surely the colleges as stakeholders needed to have taken stock of the consequences, before allowing the BSO to move on their short-sighted project?

This type of development could break (or perhaps make?), our profession. We must take the long view and look at the big picture. 

I am relaxed Ronan, as with some other discussions, I should have put a few more :)) into my post to make it nice & friendly. In other words I would say, yes I think it's a very good idea of the BSO and opportunity for PTs:) Best Regards.

Ronan O'Brien said:

Relax Raf, your jumping on this in a very personal way. This discussion is not about the pros and cons of physiotherapy (or osteopathy), it is about whether osteopathy can be taught in 2 years, and if it is in the professions interest to allow this.  

My personal view is that physios and Doctors should have to train even longer.  After all, they have that much more brainwashing to undo.  Consultant neurosurgeons should take longest of all, lest they leap to operate on every case they can't resolve before the insurance company stops paying out.

rafalkra said:

OMG, I know that osteopaths are (and should be) very proud of their profession but, looking from my point of view, why do you think physiotherapists are not good enough to become osteopaths? In my country one can enroll to osteopathy 'school' only being physio first. Is your anatomy and physiology different from others? Technical things have been taught on courses for years, the rest, for those who really want to graft an osteopathic philosophy into they practice, is only a matter of their attitude.And last but not least, perceiving physiotherapy to be inferior to osteopathy is merely misunderstanding resulting from ignorance:) IMHO, it can only enrich your practice.

I agree, this seems to be the BSO's corporate side shining through.  Don't they have enough unemployed graduates already?  Perhaps the GOsC took this into account when arriving at an 8% fee reduction.

Hume O'Rous said:

I have the same misgivings as Vincent and Cloilde. We are witnesses to a further fragmentation of osteopathic medicine in the UK, and we seem to be incapable of halting the rot. I suspect (without wishing to start an internecine collegiate bloodbath), that the BSO are acting out of self-interest and to increase its student numbers.

There are fewer and fewer individuals willing to commit to osteopathy as we are fast losing our identity as an autonomous healthcare group. The regulator has to take its (lion's) share of the blame for this, but surely the colleges as stakeholders needed to have taken stock of the consequences, before allowing the BSO to move on their short-sighted project?

This type of development could break (or perhaps make?), our profession. We must take the long view and look at the big picture. 

Well, it depends on how PTs are trained in the UK. I am pretty sure that most of the BSO's students from Poland were/are PTs. Believe me or not, we do have wider perception of the human body than one can imagine:) Nice discussion BTW.

I brought this up with some of the SMT (senior management team) during a meeting. My main gripe being that the BSO now allow physios to get a FULL M.Sc in 2 years. Whereas us mere osteopathic students are paying them for 4 years get an M.Ost which offers no credit towards an M.Sc. We would require another 2 years of study to become M.Sc in Osteopathy - taking the total to 6 years (7 for MM) versus 5 (Physio degree + BSO Master's) for a physiotherapist.

This is already unfair before we've even discussed whether these Physios - who will carry a higher qualification in Osteopathy than even the best standard BSO graduate - can learn osteopathy to even the same level in 2 years.

My main gripe however is the devaluation of the M.Sc in all this:

Presumably the Physios will be taught the same theories and techniques in this 'Master's' that current undergraduates are taught. That's fine, but two undergraduate degrees do not and have never equaled a full Master's. A 'Master of Science' is exactly that - somebody who has mastered independent scientific method and study.It does not cover somebody who has simply been taught or has learned a lot about different sciences or has been able to learn a new one in half the normal time.

To be honest, calling a newly qualified Osteopath a 'Master of Osteopathy' is already pushing it a bit. As a practical study, mastery takes a decade or more to achieve. Awarding an M.Sc to Physio's after a two year 'top up' course is an insult to all regular osteopaths (especially the D.O's who ironically make up all our true Master's) and frankly, an insult to real M.Sc's in fully scientific disciplines.

To answer the main thread  I honestly think Physio's CAN learn in 2 years:

- but we should (like BCOM) award D.O's to our graduatess alongside our degrees, that way we can simply add D.O to the physios previous qualification so that we all stay on an equal footing.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2012   Created by Ronan O'Brien.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service