Effects of a refugee elective on medical student perceptions

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There are growing numbers of refugees throughout the world. Refugee health is a relatively unstudied and rarely taught component of medical education. In response to this need, a Refugee Health Elective was begun. Medical student perceptions toward cultural aspects of medicine and refugee health before and after participation in the elective were measured.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Preliminary questionnaires were given to all preclinical students at the academic year commencement with follow-up questionnaires at the refugee elective's conclusion. Both questionnaires examined students' comfort in interacting with patients and familiarity with refugee medical issues, alternative medical practices, and social hindrances to medical care. The preliminary answers served as a control and follow-up questionnaire data were separated into participant/non-participant categories. All preclinical medical students at two Midwestern medical schools were provided the opportunity to participate in the Refugee Health Elective and surveys. The 3 data groups were compared using unadjusted and adjusted analysis techniques with the Kruskall-Wallis, Bonferroni and ANCOVA adjustment. P-values < 0.05 were considered significant.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>408 and 403 students filled out the preliminary and follow-up questionnaires, respectfully, 42 of whom participated in the elective. Students considering themselves minorities or multilingual were more likely to participate. Elective participants were more likely to be able to recognize the medical/mental health issues common to refugees, to feel comfortable interacting with foreign-born patients, and to identify cultural differences in understanding medical/mental health conditions, after adjusting for minority or multilingual status.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>As medical schools integrate a more multicultural curriculum, a Refugee Health Elective for preclinical students can enhance awareness and promote change in attitude toward medical/mental health issues common to refugees. This elective format offers tangible and effective avenues for these topics to be addressed.</p

Disentangling manual muscle testing and Applied Kinesiology: critique and reinterpretation of a literature review

Cuthbert and Goodheart recently published a narrative review on the reliability and validity of manual muscle testing (MMT) in the Journal. The authors should be recognized for their effort to synthesize this vast body of literature. However, the review contains critical errors in the search methods, inclusion criteria, quality assessment, validity definitions, study interpretation, literature synthesis, generalizability of study findings, and conclusion formulation that merit a reconsideration of the authors' findings. Most importantly, a misunderstanding of the review could easily arise because the authors did not distinguish the general use of muscle strength testing from the specific applications that distinguish the Applied Kinesiology (AK) chiropractic technique. The article makes the fundamental error of implying that the reliability and validity of manual muscle testing lends some degree of credibility to the unique diagnostic procedures of AK. The purpose of this commentary is to provide a critical appraisal of the review, suggest conclusions consistent with the literature both reviewed and omitted, and extricate conclusions that can be made about AK in particular from those that can be made about MMT. When AK is disentangled from standard orthopedic muscle testing, the few studies evaluating unique AK procedures either refute or cannot support the validity of AK procedures as diagnostic tests. The evidence to date does not support the use of MMT for the diagnosis of organic disease or pre/subclinical conditions