Flexner Report

The Flexner Report was instrumental in changing the profession of medicine in North America. This document was submitted by Abraham Flexner in 1910 as the culmination of his investigation of each medical school operative at that time". Financed by a group of physicians, educators, and philanthropists, the report, entitled "Medical Education in the United States and Canada. A Report to the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching" and was published as a bulletin of the Carnegie Foundation and released to the public as well as to various professional associations.

Flexner's report included his conclusions and collected data after he had "evaluated all 155 medical schools in the United States and Canada" by interviewing faculty, reviewing financial records, and making site visits to the facilities. These ranged from university affiliated X year programs with admission standards that included XX, to programs run by individual physicians in private practice that had no formal admission standards, no laboratory teaching in science and no criteria for graduation other than successful payment of fees.

Flexner and the Carnegie foundation valued medical training that was based in science rather than tradition, and that was academic rather than commercial in nature. The report made this bias clear even in its introduction, as well as the conclusion that there seemed to be both well-trained physicians in North America, who were literate in Latin, and well-versed in laboratory science, as well as poorly trained and uneducated physicians,who were ignorant of scientific methods and advances and had received no higher education. Further, the report emphasized that the public had no means to distinguish the qualified from the unqualified. Beyond the individual welfare of patients, which the report depicted as the "unwitting" victims of newly minted physicians who were sent out from the inadequate schools to learn their skills by trial and error, the Flexner Report that the entire community suffered or benefitted according to the quality of its physicians - who were respnsible for setting the standards of public sanitation. The tone of much of the report is scathing, describing entire schools as "filthy" or "utterly hopeless". Since this report stressing the concept that the public welfare was jeapordized by the "inadequately trained physician" was widely circulated, it is easy to understand why popular demand for the reform of medical education followed its publication.

Education of medical physicians and surgeons in the 19th century In the USA, requirements at different medical schools varied tremendously. Only a minority of medical schools were affiliated with universities, there were dozens of small "proprietary" schools of medicine that were administered by physicians in private practice. Medicine was viewed as a trade by many physicians, and teaching in a medical school- or running one, was seen by these businessmen-physicians as a legitimate source of revenue. With the westward expansion of the United States over the 19th Century, the frontier areas held relatively few educated people, and there were different standards set as towns and cities grew than existed in the more established areas in the East.

In many regions of the USA, such as rural and recent frontier states, there was no regulation of these schools. As state boards of health were established, many of the school came under the purview of these government agencies.

Even now, the Flexner Report is a historically important document as it captures a description of medical education of its time.

Particular schools lauded

Johns Hopkins

Recommendations for professional medical education

The report advised cutting the number of schools from 155 to 31, and argued that doing so would increase rather than decrease the quality of medical care in the two countries. The demographics of the schools were analyzed so as to leave no major region of the United States without a school of medicine. Part of tat analysis looked at "sects" of medicine, so called allopathy, homeopathy etc. Flexner stated that modern medicine belonged to none of these sects, but was a discipline in which knowledge was rationally applied to cure disease, in contrast to pre-conceived generalizations regarding diseases and their cures, like allopathy (dislike cures like) or homeopathy (cures of similars). He quoted the great American physician of the day, Osler, " A new school of pracitioners has arisen which cares nothing for homeopathy and still less for so-called allopathy. It seeks to study, rationally and scientifically, the action of drugs, old and new."(page 162)

Sectarian Schools

Although there were no sectarian schools in Canada, 32 were identified in the United States.15 homeopathic, 8 eclectic, 1 physiomedical, and 8 osteopathic.

Homeopathic

Of the homeopathc schools, only five required so much as a high school diploma for entrance and 2 had no educational pre-requisites at all. Several schools were noted to have adequate laboratory facilities, these included the school associated with Boston University, the New York Homeopathy College and the Hahneman School of Philadelphia.

In contrast, several homeopathic schools in Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, and Michigan were condemned as "utterly hopeless" (p.160), with managers "unfit for any educational purpose" and inhabiting physical plants that were both "filthy and neglected". Flexner also criticized the overall lack of "clinical material" (meaning patients)available to students, claiming that some schools were restricted to ampitheater teaching, rather than offering bedside teaching in wards.

Interestingly, the report mentions that the number of schools and the enrollment of students in the homeopathic schools was markedly reduced from ten years previously. In 1900 the graduating classes totalled 413 (from 22 schools), and, by 1910, were cut "almost in half" to 246 (from the 15 remaining schools).

Eclectic

Of the 8 eclectic schools, one, in New York City, required the Regents High School diploma for entry, the others had nominal requirements. Three of the schools were described as having some modest assests, but the "remaining five eclectic schools are without exception filthy and almost bare." The laboratory equipment at all of these schools was dismissed as not remotely resembling the equipment claimed in their catalogs. In assessing the eclectic schools exposure of students to clinical material in the form of patients, he stated "of the schools under discussion, none has decent clinical opportunities", and went on to claim that what the 3 best of the 8 schools had was "criminally inadequate", the "other five schools have literally nothing at all".

The eclectic schools, like the homeopathic schools were dwindling in numbers at the time of his assessment, with two schools closed since the height of ten in 1901, and overall enrollment down to 413 from 1014 in 1904.

Osteopathic

The 8 osteopathic schools "fairly reek with commercialism", Flexner complained, quoting brochures that claimed"...our graduates earn in a single month what they formerly able to earn by a full year's work". Although Flexner was uniformly critical of schools that promoted careers in medicine to prospective students on the basis of finances, he analyzed each school's finances with an accountant's eye. Whereas other sorts were condemned for poverty, the osteopathic schools were roundly criticized for making a profit from their students.

He argued that even though the osteopathic "sect" relied on spinal manipulation as a uniform treatment, that this did not excuse them from enabling their students to make a diagnosis, and that the short course of 3 years, the lack of laboratory facilities was woefully inadequate. He found particular fault with the "fatally defective" teaching in anatomy, which he argued should be the cornerstone of a school that emphasized spinal manipulation.

University affiliation

Neither Abraham Flexner or the Carnegie Foundation was neutral towards educational philosophies in medicine."For profit" schools, for which the term "proprietary" was coined, were deplored and academic education in a University setting of a "higher calling" was openly admired. Mere affiliation was not enough to earn the Carnegie Foundation's approval, the President of the Foundation, Henry S. Prtchett, argued that a University must support a medical school at a high level of educational standards and provide first class physical and laboratory facilities in his introduction to the report. His language was blunt to the point of being inflammatory: " There is a certain minimum of equipment and a certain minimum of educational requirement without which no attempt ought to be made to teach medicine. Hitherto not only proprietary medical schools, but colleges and universities, have paid scant attention to that fact. They have been ready to assume the responsibility of turning loose upon a helpless community men licensed to the practice of medicine without any serious thought as to whether they had received a fair training or not" (page xii, Introduction. Flexner Report.)

Hospital for clinical training

Flexner stated that a hospital for clinical training was as important to a medical school as a laboratory for training in chemistry or pathology. Just as he specified that adequate laboratories were well equipped and supervised, he specified that the appropriate hospital was to be under the direction of the medical school.

Impact of the Flexner Report

"Although reform in medical education was already under way, Flexner's report fueled change by criticizing the mediocre quality and profit motive of many schools and teachers, the inadequate curricula and facilities at a number of schools, and the nonscientific approach to preparation for the profession, which contrasted with the university-based system of medical education in Germany."(reference for quote: Cooke, Molly; Irby, David M.; Sullivan, William; Ludmerer, Kenneth M. Medical Education: American Medical Education 100 Years after the Flexner Report. New England Journal of Medicine. 355(13):1339, September 28, 2006.)

Many Medical Schools Closed, Selected "Allopathic", and Osteopathic Schools Survive

Johns Hopkins University was lauded in the Flexner Report.

External links

PDF Image of the full text of the original Flexner Report- provided by the Carnegie Foundation [1]

Beck AH (2004) The Flexner Report and the standardization of American medical education. JAMA 291:2139-2140.