Benefit-cost analysis of becoming certified pollinator friendly.

Despite significant drop in pollinator abundance, no studies exist on the benefits and costs of pollinator conservation in the public domain. An in-person survey was conducted at three large, public US universities to estimate benefits to become Bee Campus USA certified. We test whether different types of reminders on existing student sustainability fees affect Willingness to Pay. Costs of achieving this certification per university were obtained. Net Present Value demonstrates that the net benefits to each school are largely positive, except under the most restrictive assumption. Information reminders of existing fees lead to little change in support of pollinator conservation.

The Estimated Cost of Maintenance of Certification.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance of Certification (MOC) is a controversial topic in medicine for many different reasons. Studies have suggested that there may be associations between fewer negative outcomes and participation in MOC. However, MOC still remains controversial because of its cost. We sought to determine the estimated cost of MOC to the average orthopaedic surgeon, including fees and time cost, defined as the market value of the physician's time. METHODS: We calculated the total cost of MOC to be the sum of the fees required for applications, examinations, and other miscellaneous fees as well as the time cost to the physician and staff. Costs were calculated for the oral, written, and American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Web-based Longitudinal Assessment (ABOS WLA) MOC pathways based on the responses of 33 orthopaedic surgeons to a survey sent to a state orthopaedic society. RESULTS: We calculated the average orthopaedic surgeon's total cost in time and fees over the decade-long period to be $71,440.61 ($7,144.06 per year) for the oral examination MOC pathway and $80,391.55 ($8,039.16 per year) for the written examination pathway. We calculated the cost of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery web-based examination pathway to be $69,721.04 ($6,972.10 per year). CONCLUSIONS: The actual cost of MOC is much higher than just the fees paid to organizations providing services. The majority of the cost comes in the form of time cost to the physician. The ABOS WLA was implemented to alleviate the anxiety of a high-stakes examination and to encourage efficient longitudinal learning. We found that the ABOS WLA pathway does save time and money when compared with the written examination pathway when review courses and study periods are taken. We believe that future policy changes should focus on decreasing physician time spent completing MOC requirements, and decreasing the cost of these requirements, while preserving the model of continued evidence-based medical education.

The evolving maintenance of certification process: update on the financial status of the medical boards.

Medical board organizations have accumulated large asset balances, in part due to the monetization of physician board recertification, as well as capital gains in positive investment conditions. Physicians across the country have raised concerns regarding the effectiveness and efficiency of existing recertification processes, to which the American Board of Medical Specialties and independent accreditation boards have responded with newly instituted changes. The present article analyzes the publicly available F990 tax forms of the medical boards in an effort to provide data to the ongoing debate. Although some boards have begun to mobilize assets in recent years, many continue to accumulate wealth. It remains to be seen whether the new recertification programs will bring about change or perpetuate organizational wealth.

What Is Stroke Certification and Does It Matter?

Many academic and community hospitals have obtained, or are considering obtaining, stroke center certification. Participation in structured quality improvement programs that also incorporate an objective assessment has been shown to improve outcomes and foster team building. Although obtaining certification can be challenging and costly, it can provide a framework to ensure hospitals deliver high- level, evidence-based stroke care. For the intensive care unit nurse, awareness and participation in the certification programs process is an important part of professional nursing practice.

Costs and Benefits of Initial Certification for Emergency Medicine Residency Graduates.

BACKGROUND: Graduates of emergency medicine residency programs can seek certification from the American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM), yet the costs and perceived value by residents is not clear. OBJECTIVE: This report sought to better define the value of board certification by asking physicians taking the ABEM Oral Certification Examination (OCE) to describe its costs (eg, time, money) and perceived benefits. METHODS: A descriptive, cross-sectional, voluntary, anonymous survey was administered to physicians taking the 2018 spring and fall ABEM OCEs. Response frequencies were used to report response rates. RESULTS: There were 2016 physicians who participated in the 2018 OCEs, of whom 1565 (78%) completed a survey. With respect to preparation, 38% (599 of 1565 responses) spent more than 30 hours preparing for the examination. Regarding the expense of preparing for the examination, 21% (328) spent nothing, 50% (776) spent less than $1,000, and 2% (38) spent more than $3,000. Most physicians (80%, 1254) reported a learning benefit to preparing for and taking the OCE. There were 49% (765) of respondents who reported that preparing for the examination reinforced their knowledge of emergency medicine; 20% (311) reported no learning benefit. Most physicians (92%, 1442) reported that ABEM certification provided a career benefit, the most common of which was more career opportunities (69%, 1076). CONCLUSIONS: Initial certification requires a considerable investment of time and money. Physicians seeking initial ABEM certification found both learning and professional benefits, with the most frequently reported being reinforcement of medical knowledge and more career opportunities.

The implementation of the bioequivalence certification policy in Chile: An analysis of market authorization data.

BACKGROUND: Affordability is a key barrier to access to medicines. Generic medicines policies can address this barrier and promote access. Successful uptake of generic medicines depends, in part, on ensuring that these products are interchangeable with reference products. Typically, bioequivalence certification is established in order to demonstrate such interchangeability. OBJECTIVE: To study the implementation of the bioequivalence certification policy in Chile. METHODS: We used Chilean Market Regulatory Authority data for analysis to study the number of products that obtained bioequivalence certification, the time until bioequivalence certification and associated factors to obtain bioequivalence. RESULTS: As of January 2017, out of 2,336 products with a valid market authorization containing at least one of the 167 APIs that required BE certification, 1,026 products actually have BE certification (1,026/2,336, 43.9% compliance). Where data were available, the time between submission of the market authorization as a bioequivalent product to final authorization by the national medicine regulatory authority for most products varied between 4-6 months. The fraction of all BE products containing a given API out of the total marketed products containing that API varies considerably, e.g. for the API olmesartan there was only a single BE product marketed, the API diclofenac had none. CONCLUSIONS: Although the implementation of Chile's bioequivalence policy increased the number of bioequivalent products, over 50% of generic products requiring bioequivalence that did not obtain this certification. Also for some of the API none or very few BE products are marketed which limits the success of a substitution policy. Further studies are required to identify the apparent lack of incentives to obtain bioequivalence certification. Studies of sales volumes and prices of the products are needed to identify whether generic products without bioequivalence certification either become bioequivalent or eventually exit the market.

Correlates of Patient-Centered Medical Home Recognition in School-Based Health Centers.

BACKGROUND: The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is promoted as a way to improve access to care, health care outcomes, and control costs. The organizational, environmental, and patient characteristics associated with school-based health centers (SBHCs) obtaining PCMH recognition is currently unknown. A multitheoretical approach was used to explore the correlates of formal PCMH recognition in SBHCs. METHODS: The 2013-2014 National Census of School-Based Health Centers was used as the primary data source for this analysis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the odds of an SBHC obtaining any type of PCMH recognition, and obtaining national PCMH recognition. RESULTS: Only 29% of SBHCs had received any type of recognition as a PCMH and 17% reported receiving national-level recognition. School-based health centers that were managed care preferred providers, received Health Resources and Services Administration SBHC Capital Funding, and based in schools without adolescents had greater odds of both types of PCMH recognition outcomes. High levels of revenue from patient billing and more staff were also associated with national PCMH recognition. CONCLUSIONS: Financial and personnel resources are needed for national-level PCMH recognition, and managed care is supportive of PCMH implementation. Efforts should be made to increase medical home activity in SBHCs that serve adolescents.

An Australian Biobank Certification Scheme: A Study of Economic Costs to Participating Biobanks.

Biobanks face increasing demands for research materials of consistent quality, which can be used in collaborative studies. Several countries and some international agencies have made formal efforts to standardize biobank operations and outputs. These include the establishment of best practice guidelines for collection management, and certification programs. Such guidelines and programs increase biobanks' opportunities for participation in high impact research and funding. However, they also impose economic and time costs, which may burden biobanks. This study aimed to estimate the costs of gaining certification and maintaining certification (i.e., committing extra resources to continue standards) for three cancer biobanks participating in a biobank certification program in New South Wales, Australia. To gather cost data for a range of cancer biobanks, we recruited three with different full time equivalent (FTE) staff levels (1.0-3.0), recognizing FTE staff level as an indicator of resources and operating scale. In extended interviews with staff, we gathered biobanks' expected costs in obtaining and annually maintaining certification. The biobank with the highest staff level reported the lowest expected costs in gaining certification, due to the strong prealignment of its present operations with certification requirements. The other biobanks expected higher costs as their operations required greater adjustments. Overall, relative costs of gaining certification were between 2% and 6% of current total annual wage costs. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first such costing study of a biobank certification program. Supplementary Data include the interview schedule that other biobanks may use to estimate their own economic certification costs.

Maintenance of Certification and the Challenge of Professionalism.

Board certification has been part of the social contract in which physicians commit to maintaining up-to-date scientific knowledge and improving the quality of patient care. However, the maintenance of certification program has been controversial. This review summarizes the philosophical underpinnings, published literature, recent improvements, and future directions of the American Board of Pediatrics maintenance of certification program.

Results of the 2015 Perfusionist Salary Study.

Presently, there exists no published valid and reliable salary study of clinical perfusionists. The objective of the 2015 Perfusionist Salary Study was to gather verifiable employee information to determine current compensation market rates (salary averages) of clinical perfusionists working in the United States. A salary survey was conducted between April 2015 and March 2016. The survey required perfusionists to answer questions about work volume, scheduling, and employer-paid compensation including benefits. Participants were also required to submit a de-identified pay stub to validate the income they reported. Descriptive statistics were calculated for all survey questions (e.g., percentages, means, and ranges). The study procured 481 responses, of which 287 were validated (i.e., respondents provided income verification that matched reported earnings). Variables that were examined within the validated sample population include job title, type of institution of employment, education level, years of experience, and geographic region, among others. Additional forms of compensation which may affect base compensation rates were also calculated including benefits, call time, bonuses, and pay for ancillary services (e.g., extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and ventricular assist device). In conclusion, in 2015, the average salary for all perfusionists is $127,600 with 19 years' experience. This research explores the average salary within subpopulations based on other factors such as position role, employer type, and geography. Information from this study is presented to guide employer compensation programs and suggests the need for further study in consideration of attrition rates and generational changes (i.e., perfusionists reaching retirement age) occurring alongside the present perfusionist staffing shortage affecting many parts of the country.

Using Certification to Promote Uptake of Real-World Evidence by Payers.

Most randomized controlled trials are unable to generate information about a product's real-world effectiveness. Therefore, payers use real-world evidence (RWE) generated in observational studies to make decisions regarding formulary inclusion and coverage. While some payers generate their own RWE, most cautiously rely on RWE produced by manufacturers who have a strong financial interest in obtaining coverage for their products. We propose a process by which an independent body would certify observational studies as generating valid and unbiased estimates of the effectiveness of the intervention under consideration. This proposed process includes (a) establishing transparent criteria for assessment, (b) implementing a process for receipt and review of observational study protocols from interested parties, (c) reviewing the submitted protocol and requesting any necessary revisions, (d) reviewing the study results, (e) assigning a certification status to the submitted evidence, and (f) communicating the certification status to all who seek to use this evidence for decision making. Accrediting organizations such as the National Center for Quality Assurance and the Joint Commission have comparable goals of providing assurance about quality to those who look to their accreditation results. Although we recognize potential barriers, including a slowing of evidence generation and costs, we anticipate that processes can be streamlined, such as when familiar methods or familiar datasets are used. The financial backing for such activities remains uncertain, as does identification of organizations that might serve this certification function. We suggest that the rigor and transparency that will be required with such a process, and the unassailable evidence that it will produce, will be valuable to decision makers.