Extract
To The Editor:Thomas Brown, in his address as outgoing President of the Orthopaedic
Research Society (ORS) "Toward Better Interaction Between Orthopaedists
and Researchers: A Two-Way Street" (2002;84:1473-7), chronicled the
transformation of the ORS from an organization of and for surgeon-scientists
to one composed largely of nonsurgeons. He argued that this trend from a
clinical to basic-science focus is favorable and should be more tangibly
supported by the community of orthopaedic surgeons. His thesis was that the
financial and innovative health of our field is in jeopardy because it has not
supported basic research wisely and, as a result, is reliant on
"relatively simplistic procedures" with diminishing value to
society. The "better interaction," which Dr. Brown proposed, is
one in which surgeons give over a greater share of their compensation to
finance basic research directed and performed by nonclinicians. As academic
surgeons, we agree with Dr. Brown on the value and importance of quality
research, but we find this advocacy for further de-emphasis of applied
research alarming. The pathway endorsed by Dr. Brown will neither improve
cooperation between clinicians and basic scientists nor will it likely lead to
changes in the clinical practice of orthopaedic surgery. We believe that
collaboration between clinicians and basic scientists should be based upon
joint formulation of hypotheses and methods of research; collaboration should
not be defined as clinicians funding science projects.