There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality, readmissions, or length of stay between patients treated by allopathic and osteopathic surgeons, according to a recent study published in JAMA Surgery.

A cohort study led by researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles, assessed whether surgical outcomes differ between patients treated by allopathic (MD) or osteopathic (DO) surgeons. Utilizing Medicare data from 2016 to 2019, the study analyzed 2,360,108 procedures across the 14 most common surgical procedures, performed on patients aged 65 to 99 years. Of these, 91.3% were performed by MDs, and 8.7% by DOs. The study included a total of 43,651 surgeons (39,339 MDs and 4,312 DOs). The mean patient age was 74.9 years, 57.4% were female, and 89.4% were White.

The primary outcome, 30-day mortality, showed no significant difference between MDs (1.58%) and DOs (1.61%), with an adjusted risk difference of -0.04 percentage points (95% CI, -0.11 to 0.04; P = .37). Secondary outcomes, including 30-day readmission rates (MD: 6.47%; DO: 6.60%; 95% CI, -0.28 to 0.01; P = .06) and length of stay (MD: 5.07 days; DO: 5.07 days), were also comparable. Stratified analyses by surgical subspecialty, procedure, hospital characteristics, and patient characteristics also showed no significant differences.

Notable differences in practice patterns were observed. DO surgeons were more likely to treat older patients (mean age 75.3 vs 74.8 years), female patients (60.2% vs 57.1%), and Medicaid dual-eligible patients (10.3% vs 8.6%). DOs also performed a lower percentage of elective surgeries (74.2% vs 80.2%) and were more likely to practice in public hospitals (10.3% vs 9.5%) and non-teaching hospitals (42.1% vs 31.9% for MDs), among the Medicare beneficiaries in the study.

The study found no significant differences in surgical outcomes between MD and DO surgeons for common procedures, despite differences in practice patterns.

Full disclosures can be found in the published study.