U of Q and Ochsner clinic

[Dr.Millisevert]

Do you think there is a big bias against US students applying for the traditional 4 year program ??

I'm not quite sure what you mean... but I agree with redshifteffect.

The traditional 4 year med program at UQ is well established and well respected. If you can get into that program, go for it.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[redshifteffect]

How a mutual recognition policy may look like:

http://www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au/library/MRA Further information on agreement.pdf

 

[Zuckman]

That mutual recognition policy seems really good! They should really start doing this with the US and Australia for medicine.

 

[redshifteffect]

Yeah and most importantly it involves almost all of the Western English speaking nations.

 

[Dr.Millisevert]

The Ochsner program has updated their FAQ section on their website (HERE) and they still fail to answer some of the most important questions.

"State Licensing:
Q. In which states will I be eligible to practice?
A. UQ students currently are practicing throughout the United States. It is every medical student's responsibility to find out if their state will recognize them to practice medicine with an MBBS degree from the University of Queensland. Requirements vary from state to state. You can find out what your state's requirements are by going to your state medical board. The AMA has a list of state medical boards with links at:
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/2645.html"

My response: Yes, but this is NOT the UQ program ...it is different. Some states such as California may not accept graduates of this program since they did not complete their clinicals in Australia even though they could have. This does not say you can get a license in all US states. It says that you should check and it warns you by saying "Requirements vary from state to state".


"Q. Is the MBBS the same as an MD degree?
A. The MBBS degree is widely recognized in the U.S. as equivalent to the U.S. MD degree. However students are advised to check their particular state requirements as each state is different and changes occur frequently."

My response: Again, failing to instill confidence. It sounds like another caveat to me! "students are advised to check their particular state requirements as each state is different and changes occur frequently."



They have also stated that the program will not be accredited in the US. They have also stated that Australian citizens will not be allowed to apply to this program even though the degree is granted from an Publicly funded Australian state medical school! WTF! Why should the Queensland hospitals allow US citizens to do their clinicals in their hospitals if the Louisiana hospitals are unwilling to allow Australian Citizens to do their clinicals in their hospitals? Hell Ochsner is a private hospital... can't they accept Australians? They could if they wanted to. That is simply disrespectful.

 

[greens]

After actually reading their website I thought I would submit another post retracting my earlier statement that this program is a good idea. I still definitely think New Orleans is a great place to be and a good place to learn medicine, but it is quite worrying this program is only geared towards US students, as well as the fact it won't actually allow you to openly work in America and probably Australia for that matter. I also think their fees seem a little bit strange as well. The fact that they charge 50+ US for the clinical years when pre-clinical are only 48 AUS is kind of weird. Also does anyone know what the 18,500 program fee in addition to the pre-clinical years for 2010 intake actually is?
Just my two cents.

 

[OLYWA]

"it won't actually allow you to work openly in America"

Greens...I think I'm missing something here. What are you referring to with this quote/comment?

 

[jaketheory]

"it won't actually allow you to work openly in America"

Greens...I think I'm missing something here. What are you referring to with this quote/comment?

he is referring to the fact that grads will not be able to practice in places like California.

 

[jaketheory]

They have also stated that the program will not be accredited in the US.

Of course this program will not be accredited in the US! No school outside N. America is accredited by the LMCE. This is the policy of the LCME!

They have also stated that Australian citizens will not be allowed to apply to this program even though the degree is granted from an Publicly funded Australian state medical school! WTF! Why should the Queensland hospitals allow US citizens to do their clinicals in their hospitals if the Louisiana hospitals are unwilling to allow Australian Citizens to do their clinicals in their hospitals? Hell Ochsner is a private hospital... can't they accept Australians? They could if they wanted to. That is simply disrespectful.

While i think it is a little unfair for them not allow Aussies to pursue this path, I am sure the reasons are financial.

The fact that it is a publicly funded uni means nothing as international students are not subsidized by public funds, and in fact they usually pay more than the cost to train a local students. that is, internationals pay more than the sum of the local student's contribution and the gov't subsidized funding for that student. the international fees actually subsidize other parts of the uni. Training international students is a way for the uni to increase their revenue.

The US students following this path will be paying boat loads in additional fees, even more than the standard international fee rate. As domestic full fees have been abolished, for locals to follow this path, the aus gov't would have to pay for the extra cost of the program. Considering this program is geared specifically to train someone to pratice outside aus, the Aus gov't has no incentive to pay more to train its own physicians in a setting that would not adequately prepare them to serve their own communities.

 

[jaketheory]

How a mutual recognition policy may look like:

http://www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au/library/MRA Further information on agreement.pdf

even the mutual recognition that currently exists within disciplines of medicine between aus and the US are for the most part useless to international med grads.

everyone cites the fact that the RACGP and the american board of family medicine have mutual recognition agreements. while this is true, having fellowship of the RACGP deems one eligible to sit the board certification exam for family medicine ONLY if other criteria are met. One of the other criteria is having a full and unrestricted license to practice medicine in the US, which as an IMG you cannot get without completing 2 or more years of ACGME accredited GME residency training. Thus, this mutual recognition does not in actually allow you to practice in the US without retraining.

 

[deleted21609]

The arguments against this program are absurd. No offense, but the program is designed to let American's who didn't get into medical school in the US attend medical school half abroad and half back home. A lot of people from the US go to Europe and Australia for medical school, mostly because they didn't get in at home. Others go to Caribean schools because they see an advantage to doing clinical rotations in the US as a Caribean med student. This program is obviously designed to be the best combination of EuroAustralian schools with US clinical rotations for that group of applicants. Presumably working in the US system will better prepare students for residency, and contacts at Ochsner may help with residency placement more than contacts abroad.

The degree is offered by U of Q and is treated the same as any U of Q degree. The physical location of your clinical rotations doesn't make any difference with regards to ECFMG certification. There is no secret about what it takes to get certified by ECFMG, so don't act confused like this is different.

The motive for the schools is money of course. U of Q gets paid to let some extra students sit in lectures that will be given anyway = free money. Ochsner gets money, medical students to work with their residents (in addition to Tulane and LSU med students), and possibly a boost in the academic nature of their clinic. Training US students abroad is big business and U of Q and Ochsner want a piece of the action.

It should come as no surprise and shouldn't be worrying that it is only for Americans. Of course Australians can't get in. It is not designed as a study abroad experience. It is for US students who plan to do residencies in the US.

You will be able to work in the US, even in California. You just have to get ECFMG certification like any foreign grad, and go through the extra hurdles California set up. They have to add a disclaimer to avoid future lawsuits, not because you will have any problem.

MD vs MBBS. Whatever your state's policy about what goes on your nametag, it makes no difference to your practice or life. It's hardly Ochsner's job to stay abreast of irrelevant changes to nametags across the country.

 

[jaketheory]

I agree totally with student.ie.

however, i feel that providing such a program makes obvious comparisons to caribean schools unavoidable, which unfortunately will likely hurt UQ's international reputation.

You will be able to work in the US, even in California. You just have to get ECFMG certification like any foreign grad, and go through the extra hurdles California set up. They have to add a disclaimer to avoid future lawsuits, not because you will have any problem.

i have not researched this at all, but from the few comments i've read on these forums, California requires IMG's to have completed their clinical years in the country in which the degree granting institution is located. This is completely seperate from the "extra hurdle" of being granted an authorization for postgrad medical education, which other states do not require. if this is true, you would not be able to practice in CA as the clinicals for this program are not completed in Aus. This would be the same drawback that students studying in the Caribean would face, at least those returning to the US for clinicals (which i believe is all of them, hence their appeal).

 

[JoeNamaMD]

UQ already allows international students plenty of opportunity to complete clinical electives in their home countries. I do not like this program at all and it will hurt the school's reputation. They only plan to admit 20 students a year, for 20 students, its an awful way to ruin the reputation of the other 1600 students at UQ.
California is notorious for putting up hurdles against IMGs and I seriously doubt this program has CA approval. The regular UQ program is CA eligible.

 

[Zuckman]

This January they will enroll 20 students. The next year they are planning 80 students. The year after that, they are planning 120 students. This is what the plan is. I've read their official proposal that was on the UQ site.

 

[Dr.Millisevert]

Thus, this mutual recognition does not in actually allow you to practice in the US without retraining.

Which is why the LCME should develop a mutual agreement with the AMC just like they have with Canada.

Of course this program will not be accredited in the US! No school outside N. America is accredited by the LMCE. This is the policy of the LCME!

Wrong. LCME does not "accredit" Canadian medical schools. They have an agreement with the Canadian accreditation committee. They could if they wanted develop the same agreement with the AMC.

 

[Dr.Millisevert]

The arguments against this program are absurd. No offense, but the program is designed to let American's who didn't get into medical school in the US attend medical school half abroad and half back home.

Why would an Australian medical school like UQ want to devalue their degree and their reputation by becoming just like a Caribbean medical school for US rejects?

The degree is offered by U of Q and is treated the same as any U of Q degree. The physical location of your clinical rotations doesn't make any difference with regards to ECFMG certification. There is no secret about what it takes to get certified by ECFMG, so don't act confused like this is different.

Wrong. First of all ECFMG does not certify or accredit any schools. Secondly, there are some Caribbean medical schools that are listed in WHO/IMED (which qualifies them for ECFMG), but their graduates are not allowed to be licensed in all US states (ex: California).

 

[Dr.Millisevert]

UQ already allows international students plenty of opportunity to complete clinical electives in their home countries. I do not like this program at all and it will hurt the school's reputation. They only plan to admit 20 students a year, for 20 students, its an awful way to ruin the reputation of the other 1600 students at UQ.
California is notorious for putting up hurdles against IMGs and I seriously doubt this program has CA approval. The regular UQ program is CA eligible.

Exactly!

 

[Zuckman]

I really believe that Australian schools should be LCME accredited. If not, then they should have some reciprocity with their post-grad training. There is reciprocity with the Commonwealth nations so why not the US? It's simply politics getting in the way!

The American University of Beirut and the University of the Phillipines were once LCME approved but lost their accreditation back in the 60's (U of P) and the 80's (AUB). The 80's is not that long ago. So, some universities outside of North America have been LCME accredited.

 

[jaketheory]

Wrong. LCME does not "accredit" Canadian medical schools. They have an agreement with the Canadian accreditation committee. They could if they wanted develop the same agreement with the AMC.

dude, chill. i didnt even say the lcme accreditted canadian med school. so nit picky. they could develop such an agreement with the AMC, but they won't.

 

[JoeNamaMD]

I seriously doubt Australian medical schools will ever get LCME accreditation, and contrary to what many think, Aussies are not as keen on going to North America as people think. In fact my first year in Australia was a big bruise to my ego as many people I met did not think much of life in the US. Out of any country overseas, the UK has the largest number of Australians living abroad, then continental European countries next. LCME accreditation would basically open up local doctors to competition from the US and Canada, most doctors here do not want that. Also in light of the drastically increased student numbers in medical school here, there really is no reason for this anyway. North American students who are interested in going back home have obvious reasons for wanting the LCME accreditation because it will be a lot easier to get residency training if Australian medical graduates are put on the same level playing field as US and Canadian Allopathic graduates, its just wishful thinking. Australian graduates used to have a relatively easy path towards working in the UK but that has become more difficult as they require the PLAB these days. Still since many Aussies can get a second UK passport, I would wager that would expedite things, and there are a considerable number of British students that study Medicine and Dentistry here but nowhere near as large as the number of Canadians and Americans.
From my knowledge, Canada, New Zealand, and Ireland, are the countries where Aussie grads have had little or no trouble having their residency training recognized towards licensure. I have heard of occasional Australian trained doctors being able to work in the US in some capacity, but most are in academia, not clinical practice.

 

[redshifteffect]

Although UQ does charge international students more money then locals, the point is that they still give international students the ability to be fully licensed as a doctor in Australia. If the aim of this program is to send US students back home, then they should make them sign an agreement saying that they will not try and practice medicine in Australia, or make them pass the AMC like other overseas doctors.

I don't think it's fair to put these graduates in the same category as other Australian graduates. Even though they may be getting an Australian degree, they will have barely seen or interacted with an Australian patient. There is no way that students who trained for two years in America would be able to know how things work in Australia; and my argument is that these doctors would then in effect be no different then the IMGs.

 

[jaketheory]

Although UQ does charge international students more money then locals, the point is that they still give international students the ability to be fully licensed as a doctor in Australia. If the aim of this program is to send US students back home, then they should make them sign an agreement saying that they will not try and practice medicine in Australia, or make them pass the AMC like other overseas doctors.

I don't think it's fair to put these graduates in the same category as other Australian graduates. Even though they may be getting an Australian degree, they will have barely seen or interacted with an Australian patient. There is no way that students who trained for two years in America would be able to know how things work in Australia; and my argument is that these doctors would then in effect be no different then the IMGs.

totally agree.

 

[jaketheory]

I seriously doubt Australian medical schools will ever get LCME accreditation, and contrary to what many think, Aussies are not as keen on going to North America as people think. In fact my first year in Australia was a big bruise to my ego as many people I met did not think much of life in the US. Out of any country overseas, the UK has the largest number of Australians living abroad, then continental European countries next. LCME accreditation would basically open up local doctors to competition from the US and Canada, most doctors here do not want that. Also in light of the drastically increased student numbers in medical school here, there really is no reason for this anyway. North American students who are interested in going back home have obvious reasons for wanting the LCME accreditation because it will be a lot easier to get residency training if Australian medical graduates are put on the same level playing field as US and Canadian Allopathic graduates, its just wishful thinking. Australian graduates used to have a relatively easy path towards working in the UK but that has become more difficult as they require the PLAB these days. Still since many Aussies can get a second UK passport, I would wager that would expedite things, and there are a considerable number of British students that study Medicine and Dentistry here but nowhere near as large as the number of Canadians and Americans.
From my knowledge, Canada, New Zealand, and Ireland, are the countries where Aussie grads have had little or no trouble having their residency training recognized towards licensure. I have heard of occasional Australian trained doctors being able to work in the US in some capacity, but most are in academia, not clinical practice.

this is what i am saying. lcme accreditation is not going to happen for a school outside the US. it is wishful thinking for international students to think otherwise.

i was under the impression that people from english speaking countries didnt have to take the plab. this is from a cousin of mine who is an ENT surgeon in N. Ireland. Also, i think it has been quite a while (decades even?) since aussies could get a UK passport. i think the real barrier for aussies going to the UK is the EU. the new EU system in the UK requires foundation years 1 and 2 before specialty training, and EU citizens get preference. considering there are way more Eu citizens wanting UK specialty training position than positions available means non-eu citizens have virtually no hope.

 

[deleted21609]

Why would an Australian medical school like UQ want to devalue their degree and their reputation by becoming just like a Caribbean medical school for US rejects?





Wrong. First of all ECFMG does not certify or accredit any schools. Secondly, there are some Caribbean medical schools that are listed in WHO/IMED (which qualifies them for ECFMG), but their graduates are not allowed to be licensed in all US states (ex: California).

1) There is no reason in the world to think the program would hurt UQ's reputation. On the contrary, many people who would never have heard of UQ will now work with it's graduates. If they do a good job training the students, then UQ's reputation will improve.

2) I didn't say ECFMG accredited the school. It processes the accredidation of foreign graduates for practice in the US. Maybe you should think more before you respond and put up poorly thought out arguments against a totally reasonable program less.

3) If you don't like the sound of it, don't apply. I assure you they will have more than enough applicants.

4) No school outside NA will ever get LCME accredidation. It is not even worth discussing that point.

 

[Zuckman]

LCME accreditation won't happen. However, I think it should. There was the American University in Beirut that had LCME accreditation and it was in Lebanon. The LCME accreditation of AUB stopped in the late 1980's.

In terms of the UK post-grad training, it's in shambles right now. There's too much competition because a lot of the Europeans want to go to the UK for training. That's why Australia is a much better place right now, even for Internationals. There are MANY UK medical grads coming to Australia for post-grad training.

 

[Dr.Millisevert]

4) No school outside NA will ever get LCME accredidation. It is not even worth discussing that point.

LCME accreditation won't happen. However, I think it should.

Canadian schools are not LCME accredited!!! They are only "accredited" by CACMS (the Canadian equivalent).

Australia equally doesn't need the LCME to "accredit" their schools... simply to develop an "agreement"... again, just like they do with Canadian schools.

This agreement simply states that both have similar accreditation standards and they both have decided to accept the others as equivalent. If the LCME is already stating that the AMC has equivalent standards... then I don't see why they couldn't sit down and write out an agreement just like they have with Canada.

 

[Dr.Millisevert]

1) There is no reason in the world to think the program would hurt UQ's reputation. On the contrary, many people who would never have heard of UQ will now work with it's graduates. If they do a good job training the students, then UQ's reputation will improve.

Or... it could be more and more heavily marketed to US med school rejects and it will also be known as a Caribbean Alternate route for those who "aren't good enough" to get into a US school. Is this the image UQ grads want to have of their degree?

There are plenty of "good" Caribbean grads as well.. don't get me wrong. However, med school is whatever you make it. At the end of the day.. regardless of what Caribbean med school you went though.. you will always be viewed with the stigma of "one who wasn't good enough to get in at a US program". Period. This will be the same for UQ after a few years if this program continues.

i feel that providing such a program makes obvious comparisons to caribean schools unavoidable, which unfortunately will likely hurt UQ's international reputation.

Exactly

 

[Dr.Millisevert]

i was under the impression that people from english speaking countries didnt have to take the plab. this is from a cousin of mine who is an ENT surgeon in N. Ireland.

As of 2001 when the UK joined the EU they stopped allowing "commonwealth" grads from practicing without the PLAB. Now after they joined the EU... The UK doesn't require the PLAB from graduates of EU schools only. It has nothing to do with "English speaking". The UK requires the PLAB from all US, Canadian, Australian, NZ, etc graduates! (even if they hold a UK passport)

 

[pitman]

cripes, I don't know what the issue is here.

I remember when Weill Cornell started in Qatar, the SDN threads were soooo dominated by the naysayers, making some of the same arguments mind you -- that Cornell's rep would be hurt b.c. of comparisons with Carib schools, or because it would have to lower its standards since no one would want to go; that Cornell's program, unable to promise residency because of uncertain status with the accreditors, would be a stupid risk to take or at least a dodgy program; that Cornell saying (back then at least) you wouldn't be able to stay in Qatar once graduating somehow indicted the program; and so on.

So what if the state of California won't take UQ-Ochsner grads? California made their whack requirement in order to discriminate against Carib grads years ago, not because California statutes say anything about degree quality. But if your heart is set on practicing in Cali, then don't apply to the program.

If you have a hang up over the title of your degree (MBBS vs MD) even though there's no practical difference between them, then don't apply.

If you think others may compare your education with that offered by Carib schools just because the clinical years are spent in the US, and that bothers you, then don't apply.

If you're worried that the program won't get sufficient UQ oversight at Ochsner (though it's the same place which trains Tulane and LSU students...so I guess the worst-case scenario is that you get standard US-based clinical training??), then don't apply.

If you wouldn't want to spend all your training in Oz in case the AMC doesn't accredit the program, then don't apply. The website states this possibility in black and white, so what's there to go on about? Either it doesn't bother you, or wait and see if accreditation happens.

And if for some reason you only want to go to a school from a foreign country where there's reciprocity, then go to Canada.

I see the program as another opportunity for students. One where yes, UQ wins out because it would allow for additional students (and money) when additional clinical training spots are hard to come by in Queensland. But it's also a master stroke on the part of new Head of School Prof. Wilkinson, who's expressed long-term interests in making UQ even more international (not just importing students but exporting them), and it's in line with the international direction medical training has been heading *in spite of* the obnoxious protectionist hurdles that most developed nations have in place against IMGs.

I think the program's a great idea. I think it has the chance to become the first established, truly foreign school to crack the closed mindset and break into the US training "market" on its own turf, something the best American schools have been doing in other countries over the past decade. Maybe this is indeed a step towards future reciprocity agreements, or the general liberalization of protectionist policies...hm.

As it was, I went to UQ when the naysayers on these forums were poo pooing Aussie schools, because all the issues they harped about were, in the end, over-ridden by my interest to be somewhere foreign. People said, oh don't go you won't be able to come back. Well, those who wants to come back, come back. They also said, don't go you won't be able to stay because there won't be enough training spots. Well, those who've wanted to stay have so far been able to stay.

If I were to do med over, I'd seriously have considered doing this program, not the least because I love New Orleans. As it is, I ignored those who said "don't go because let me tell you what matters..." and came to Oz, and I'm glad I did.

 

[Jocks]

Canadian schools are not LCME accredited!!! They are only "accredited" by CACMS (the Canadian equivalent).

The LCME seems to disagree with you:

http://www.lcme.org/directry.htm

 

[JoeNamaMD]

Britain gives doctors from EU countries preference over all Commonwealth countries these days. Someone from Ireland has no problems since they are in an EU country but Australians and Canadians will have to take the PLAB. The thing that might give some Australians a better chance is that they can get a British passport which means they do not need work permits or specific visas to stay and work in Britain.

 

[JoeNamaMD]

Some top US schools like Duke and Cornell have opened up overseas campuses but they have done so by creating standalone programs. UQ Ochsner is basically a Caribbean style program, basic sciences in Australia with clinical rotations in New Orleans. Duke's program is in conjunction with the National University of Singapore. Cornell Qatar's program includes all four years in Qatar. If UQ was able to create a program in conjunction with an American medical school it would have a lot more legitimacy. Something like UQ with LSU or Tulane would be great.

 

[Dr.Millisevert]

The LCME seems to disagree with you:

http://www.lcme.org/directry.htm

That source which you listed does not claim that they "accredit" Canadian schools. Canadian medical schools are on that list because they are "approved as equivalent" by the LCME because of their cooperative accreditation agreement with the CACMS.


Here is what happens in more detail[1]:
"Each faculty undergoes a full on-site assessment visit at least every eight years by a team of trained surveyors consisting of senior leaders, educators and students. There is an LCME member on the survey team of each Canadian school, and the CACMS chair and secretary are frequent surveyors for American schools. This team prepares a formal survey report, which is given separate consideration by CACMS and the LCME. Each body makes its own determination of the school's state of compliance with the standards and determines the status of accreditation. CACMS and LCME invariably request a follow-up, ranging from a progress report to repeat limited visits or even probation, depending on the seriousness and duration of the areas of non-compliance. Adverse actions such as probation are subject to appeal.

LCME and CACMS develop and approve standards. The CACMS committee chair attends LCME committee meetings and vice-versa. The chair of CACMS sits on the various sub-committees of the LCME and provides a Canadian voice in all of the deliberations relating to the development of methods, policy and performance issues relating to accreditation."

Again, it would be very easy to work the AMC into this agreement. They could have an AMC member on the review team and vice versa.

 

[Dr.Millisevert]

The thing that might give some Australians a better chance is that they can get a British passport which means they do not need work permits or specific visas to stay and work in Britain.

It makes it "slightly" easier. Even UK citizens who attend medical school in Australia now have to write the PLAB as well (after 2001) just like everyone else. This is no different than US citizens who attend medical school outside of the US or Canada who have to obtain ECFMG certification.

 

[Dr.Millisevert]

If UQ was able to create a program in conjunction with an American medical school it would have a lot more legitimacy. Something like UQ with LSU or Tulane would be great.

Much agreed. A dual accredited program which was paired with a LSU or Tulane (rather than a private clinic) would make this a much more attractive option.

 

[pitman]

Some top US schools like Duke and Cornell have opened up overseas campuses but they have done so by creating standalone programs. UQ Ochsner is basically a Caribbean style program, basic sciences in Australia with clinical rotations in New Orleans. Duke's program is in conjunction with the National University of Singapore. Cornell Qatar's program includes all four years in Qatar. If UQ was able to create a program in conjunction with an American medical school it would have a lot more legitimacy. Something like UQ with LSU or Tulane would be great.

Why? A school affiliated with an American school is more legitimate? I think that's nonsense - there is an affiliation with a clinical program that both LSU and Tulane use, ala what's good for the goose..

One of my points was against an arbitrary point of comparison: So what if a school does clinicals somewhere else? What's the inherent difference with what Cornell does, having an entire program in another country? There isn't anything sacred about doing a whole program in one place. Likewise the problem that one might have with Carib schools doing clinicals in the US isn't the mere fact that clinicals are done in the US.

 

[JohnnyRockets]

UQ Ochsner reminds me of the English language programs in Poland, two years in Poland, then the other two in the US. People who go to those programs have told me that California gives them a hard time because that state wants its FMGs to do most of their clinical rotations in their home country.

 

[RSwim]

I am a Canadian and American who was accepted into the regular 4 year program. I just recently decided to switch into the UQ/Ochsner program for various reasons. 1.) I want to practice medicine in the US 2.) Australian internships (residencies) are becoming more and more competitive for international students 3.) Although the 4 year program allows 3 international rotations, the travel cost + cost of maintaining rent payments in Aus while also paying/renting for 8 weeks at a time internationally + the headache of organizing rotations all over the place was too much 4.) Ochsner will have preference for their own when it comes to accepting students for residency postions 5.) The LSU and Tulane students who have done rotations at Ocshner enjoy it 6.) It is a new pioneering program. This program should not be compared to Caribbean programs as you still wind up with a medical degree from an internationally recognized world class University. The only drawbacks that I see is the loss of flexibility. Instead of being able to rotate at 4 different places (3 wherever + Aus) I will be somewhat limited to doing all of my rotations at Ochsner, however, this being said, I could still do my year 1 elective internationally and PERHAPS my year 4 elective (still to be determined).

 

[SFs Own Tone]

Thanks for the post RSwim, it was very helpful.

So were Pitman's and Student.ie's.

Can we please keep the thread about UQ and Ochsner and not the LCME and AMC coming to an agreement?

 

[RSwim]

SFs O.T. - what are your plans/options/thoughts?

 

[SFs Own Tone]

RSwim,

In terms of Australian med schools; this is what I've gathered/heard and believe to be accurate.

UQ is a well respected institution- nationally and internationally. Their creation of the UQ/Oschner program provides a focused plan that provides US applicants an opportunity to study at a great medical school and receive US-appropriate clinical training. Ideal for US students who intend to practice in the US.

The reasons for it being only available to US students is because they pay the full fee without the aid of local tax dollars will not take seats away from locals who intend to practice in Australia. Which seems reasonable. If you want to practice in Australia, you apply to the regular 4 year program and compete with locals (whose future jobs in australia you would be competing for). If you want to practice overseas in the US, you only compete with others who want to practice in the US. The whole accreditation by blah-blah-blah, is more political than anything else and really not worth debating as its not gonna make a difference. The situation is what it is, what are we gonna do with it rather than complain?

I am concerned that UQ's class size is too large and the school and health system will not be able to accomodate all that they invite. If we RSVP to their party, there needs to be enough food and drinks to go around. 4 years of our time and hundreds of thousands cannot be taken lightly. I believe UQ is a great school, but are they taking on more than they can handle? That's what I would like to know.

I think the UQ/Ochsner system, is a great option for US applicants. Period. The back-up to that is staying in Australia to practice medicine, which seems to be more of concern with the large class sizes the school is taking in. Teaching you and send you back to the US isn't a huge drain on their system, finding a place for you to train in their local health system would be.

With all that being said, I've discovered alot more about USyd's medical program that really spoke to me. Their view of the medical profession coincides with my own beliefs. They are the longest and most established medical school in Australia. Their class size has remained relatively constant and they continue to evaluate their curriculum. They have the same shortage of internship spots as the rest of Australia and they do not have a 2 year US clinical program. They do however have a two elective (6 month) program to Cornell and Columbia's rotation hospitals. The University of Sydney and the city of Sydney is also a major attraction for me.

I'm debating between US DO schools/USyd/UQ. And I'm applying to all three (USyd enrollment of 2011)

My professional decision would be DO first, UQ second and USyd last if my main goal is to practice medicine in the US.
My personal decision would be USyd first, still not sure about the other two. USyd seems to fit me as an individual.

For anyone still researching, I would highly recommend checking out the link i posted in the Sydney thread about USyd GMP. (EDIT: I forgot that RSwim is already at UQ and has switched into the Ochsner program)

That being said, RSwim, what is your current experience with UQ and switching over to the Ochsner program?

 

[pitman]

I think that's a refreshingly healthy and informed outlook, SFs Own Tone. Don't let anyone sway you with their prejudices!

 

[SFs Own Tone]

I think that's a refreshingly healthy and informed outlook, SFs Own Tone. Don't let anyone sway you with their prejudices!

Thanks.

What is your opinion on the increasing class size at UQ?

I know that the curriculum (like other schools is PBL), but isn't part of the curriculum lecture based. How is UQ able to provide for their growing number of students?

 

[pitman]

Thanks.

What is your opinion on the increasing class size at UQ?

I know that the curriculum (like other schools is PBL), but isn't part of the curriculum lecture based. How is UQ able to provide for their growing number of students?

Lectures can be crowded, but they're didactic, so I don't think a big issue in themselves. Also, there's the Toowoomba school where they'll be getting their own lectures. And increasingly, lectures will be converted into VoPP, and the BlackBoard online system.

As you mention, PBL isn't much an issue because they'll just be (have been) more groups.

The bigger issue though is how in the first two years students will get the same clinical exposure (since the Ochsner students will be in Brisbane also). Some are being shunted off to Toowoomba (a campus of the medical school 90 minutes west of Brisbane), and for later years, other smaller hospitals have been opening up to training up north. But I've heard it's getting busy on the wards of some of the larger metro hospitals. Is it a "problem" though? Potentially.

A similar thing is happening later on in training -- hospitals have had to take on more interns, for example. I haven't heard of complaints from the current docs saying it's too crowded, but the risk is there. As an aside, nursing schools have been expanding in conjunction with the med schools, and just in the past year, I've seen twice as many nursing students on my wards each term. I haven't seen any problems with that, but it's certainly something noticeable.

There's also, increasingly, training being done in the private hospitals (a fairly foreign concept here). There are some growing pains with that, since private consultants and their patients often don't want junior docs doing much to them, but that mindset will of necessity change with time after a few fits.

The other main issue from my perspective is the difficulty with logistics. I think administratively the school functions fine, but it's certainly not as easy as it used to be to go knock on an admin's door and chat with them your preferences and then see some effort to accommodate you. As inherent to any bureaucracy, the bigger it is the more that's done en masse, with the school reacting to student population needs through policy changes, still with as much attention to particular needs given as is possible, but just now with less individualized attention able to be given.

Another concern brought up by some alumni stakeholders is that size may lead to a decreased sense of community, and thus to natural policing of its members. This is much more of a philosophical argument, but the concern is that size could lead to a decrease in ethical behavior of the graduating doctors. Who knows whether that'll happen, or even if it'll ever be measured.

As another aside, there was an interesing paper that came out in the States about 5 years ago which correlated ethical behavior (using state stats of disciplinary action against docs as a proxy) with MCAT scores -- the correlation was quite good, and I'd imagine a much better predictor than any interview score. At any rate, merely bringing up the paper sparked an outrage (I think it was on ValueMD) because it so happens that the so-called traditional black schools had the lowest MCAT entry scores, and thus the highest rates of future disciplinary action.

 

[RSwim]

SFs Own Tone - Thank you very much for that response. It seems that you have really thought this through. I think my post about switching into the Ochsner program wasn't clear. I am not yet in Australia, I was originally admitted to the regular program starting in January and decided just last week to switch into the Ochsner program. I am curious though as to why you think that a DO in the US would be a better professional decision than an MBBS (which you can put as MD once practicing in the US (so I have been told) ). Doesn't a DO limit your options? I am very excited for Aus but I am really interested in everyones opinions about the various programs. Thus far I have found the application process much easier and the administrative staff has been effective and efficient at answering all my questions (unlike the US where I was on many waitlists at California med schools, schools that dragged the process on for 9 months, (5.5 post interview!))

 

[SFs Own Tone]

SFs Own Tone - Thank you very much for that response. It seems that you have really thought this through. I think my post about switching into the Ochsner program wasn't clear. I am not yet in Australia, I was originally admitted to the regular program starting in January and decided just last week to switch into the Ochsner program. I am curious though as to why you think that a DO in the US would be a better professional decision than an MBBS (which you can put as MD once practicing in the US (so I have been told) ). Doesn't a DO limit your options? I am very excited for Aus but I am really interested in everyones opinions about the various programs. Thus far I have found the application process much easier and the administrative staff has been effective and efficient at answering all my questions (unlike the US where I was on many waitlists at California med schools, schools that dragged the process on for 9 months, (5.5 post interview!))

I'm from San Francisco, so I am aware that the California Med schools are an entirely different beast altogether.

A potential issue with the Ochsner program is the California stipulation that International Medical graduates get their clinical training in the same country as their first years of schooling. I know this is not the case in Caribbean schools as SGU residents work in San Francisco. However it is worth confirming with California that the UQ program will allow you to practice in California if you chose to.

I would love to study in Australia, the reasons are many. But securing a residency and matching into specialties would be much easier as a DO. DOs have every privilege in the US as an MD, just without the same common recognition. So in terms of securing a residency in the US, its significantly easier as a DO vs an IMG. You can also look at the match lists of the DO schools and see that many DOs are able to get even the most competitive specialties. An IMG, statistically speaking, is going to have a harder time.

There are many very good DO schools; ie PCOM, CCOM, MSUCOM, NYCOM, and others that have great match lists. If the only thing that mattered to me, were matching into a good residency... then i would choose DO.

Unfortunately, nothing is ever that simple. I think studying in Australia would add alot to me as doctor because they are great institutions but also would expose me to a different healthcare system. Learning the way Australia managed is population's health and distribute its resources would be extremely insightful, especially if I hope to be part of any healthcare reform. Also, Australian schools are more clinically focused than US schools. US schools emphasize the basic sciences more, which is great but problem solving and clinical skills is what clinicians do every day. The US medical system and its training seems to focus more on the letter of medicine where as the Australian schools focus on the spirit of medicine. In terms of my medical education, I strongly consider my growth as a doctor vs. just my training.

 

[shan564]

With regard to "having a harder time" as an IMG... I think there are four primary reasons for that:

1) You don't have American rec letters.

2) You're not trained specifically for the USMLE, so your scores might not be as good.

3) Most IMGs need visa sponsorship.

4) Many Americans who study abroad (mostly Caribbeans), like myself, were subpar students in the first place, so they're likely to still be subpar students when they take the USMLE.

Issue #1 is rectified with the Ochsner program or with the international rotations at the other Aussie schools. #2 and #4 are adequately addressed if you spend a lot of time studying for the USMLE - plenty of Aussie grads have done well on it. #3 isn't an issue if you're already American.

The only REAL hurdle is ECFMG certification, which is just a matter of some extra paperwork if you're already a US citizen.

Not to say that you're not at a disadvantage - but I think that a lot of times, IMGs make their disadvantage seem bigger than it really is (because they want sympathy). If you look at USMLE statistics, the average scores for each specialty are about the same for IMGs and for American grads.

 

[RSwim]

That is interesting that you know SGU grads in San Fran. I thought/I have been told that that rule in California (Have to do clinical studies in the same country as first 2 years) was designed specifically to keep Caribbean graduates out. I have been told, that this is something that the AUS/Ocshner program wants to discuss with California as they are trying very hard to distance themselves from the CAribbean programs as they claim the quality of education will be much higher. (If this issue is not resolved then I suppose this is one of the drawbacks from the UQ/Ochsner program as opposed to the regular 4 year MBBS)

 

[redshifteffect]

That is interesting that you know SGU grads in San Fran. I thought/I have been told that that rule in California (Have to do clinical studies in the same country as first 2 years) was designed specifically to keep Caribbean graduates out. I have been told, that this is something that the AUS/Ocshner program wants to discuss with California as they are trying very hard to distance themselves from the CAribbean programs as they claim the quality of education will be much higher. (If this issue is not resolved then I suppose this is one of the drawbacks from the UQ/Ochsner program as opposed to the regular 4 year MBBS)

The reason the big 3 carib schools are so expensive and attractive is that they have applied for and received approval for California.

 

[RSwim]

wow that is very interesting. Can/ do you think UQ/Ochsner would invest the time and energy into doing this? It seems like something that would be worthwhile and make that program even more attractive. When the future doctor shortage hits it will be interesting to see how the regulations change.