US Medical Licensing Exam Performance and American Board of Surgery Qualifying and Certifying Examinations.

BACKGROUND: Program directors use US Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) scores as criteria for ranking applicants. First-time pass rates of the American Board of Surgery (ABS) Qualifying (QE) and Certifying (CE) Examinations have become important measures of residency program quality. USMLE Step 1 will become pass/fail in 2022. STUDY DESIGN: American Board of Surgery QE and CE success rates were assessed considering multiple characteristics of highly ranked (top 20) applicants to 22 general surgery programs in 2011. Chi-square, t-test, Wilcoxon Rank sum, linear and logistic regression were used, as appropriate. RESULTS: The QE and CE first attempt pass rates were 96% (235/244) and 86% (190/221), respectively. QE/CE success was not significantly associated with sex, race, research experience, or publications. Alpha Omega Alpha (AΩA) status was associated with success on the index CE (98% vs 83%; p = 0.008). Step 1 and Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) scores of surgeons who passed QE on their first attempt were higher than scores of those who failed (Step 1: 233 vs 218; p = 0.016); (Step 2CK: 244 vs 228, p = 0.009). For every 10-point increase in Step 1 and 2CK scores, the odds of passing CE on the first attempt increased 1.5 times (95% CI 1.12, 2.0; p = 0.006) and 1.5 times (95% CI 1.11, 2.02, p = 0.008), respectively. For every 10-point increase in Steps 1 and 2CK scores, the odds of passing the QE on the first attempt increased 1.85 times (95% CI 1.11, 3.09; p = 0.018) and 1.86 times (95% CI 1.14, 3.06, p = 0.013), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 CK examination scores correlate with American Board of Surgery QE and CE performance and success. The USMLE decision to transition Step 1 to a pass/fail examination will require program directors to identify other factors that predict ABS performance for ranking applicants.

[Medical disciplinary boards punish more often and more severely; an observational study of 10 years of medical disciplinary law]. / Medische tuchtcolleges straffen vaker en strenger.

OBJECTIVE: To examine if the medical disciplinary law in the Netherlands is becoming tougher. DESIGN: Observational study. METHOD: We read the annual reports of the Dutch Disciplinary Committees for the Healthcare Sector 2007-2017, and registered the numbers of disciplinary cases and those cases upheld, the measures imposed and the degree of consistency in the event of an appeal. Over 400 medical disciplinary cases were reviewed in more detail. Based on these cases, we determined those variables that increase or decrease the likelihood of conviction, such as the gender of the defendants, the region in which the disciplinary case was heard, and if objective norms and professional practice guidelines had been used in arriving at the verdict. RESULTS: Each year a disciplinary case is brought against an average of 0.4% of all health care providers - mainly physicians (an average of approximately 1400 disciplinary cases each year). One-third of all disciplinary cases were dealt with in court and about half of them were upheld. Over time, the number of disciplinary cases has increased (36%), as has the percentage of cases that are upheld (27%). Additionally, heavier measures were more often imposed and the degree of consistency between the initial ruling and the ruling on appeal also increased (56%). Those factors that increased the likelihood of a case being upheld were: being a physician of male gender, the disciplinary case being heard in The Hague or Eindhoven, and the non-implementation of an objective norm or professional practice guideline in arriving at the verdict. CONCLUSION: Since 2007 the Dutch medical disciplinary boards have been punishing more often and more severely. This may be because the subjective demands made on health care professionals have changed. Arriving at an opinion subjectively is not a problem when it comes to verifying compliance with standards of due care. However, if this method is used to determine the penalty, the health care system will become defensive - and this will not improve the quality of care.

Diversity in Professionalism Framings Across U.S. Medical Boards.

Lapses in professionalism are a common cause of disciplinary action against physicians by U.S. medical boards. However, the exact definition of "professionalism" is unclear, making it likely that a physician will not train or practice under the same framing of professionalism and so may fail to develop certain skills. The goal of this study was to identify and compare the professionalism framings of medical boards. The medical board web pages for all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and four territories were examined in June 2017 for use of the word "professionalism" or "professional" in their application, rules, or laws, which was then coded as a best fit to one of six core framings of professionalism. Of the 55 states and territories, integrity was the most common professionalism framing (40.0%), followed by excellence (23.6%), behavior (12.7%), mixed (9.1%), unclear (9.1%), and absent (5.5%). Although integrity was the most common framing, diversity exists among medical boards, which could lead to board misunderstandings of incidents labeled as professionalism violations and ineffective remediation of offenses. In order to best communicate the nature of the offense and thus best facilitate remediation, the incident should be called by its true name rather than the all-encompassing term "professionalism."

The Legacy of 1987 Boreali v. Axelrod: Board of Health Rule-Making Under Siege.

We explore how a 1987 New York State court decision-Boreali v. Axelrod-affected public health rule-making nationally and, with considerable impact, locally in New York City (NYC).We discuss the history of the origin of the NYC Board of Health (BOH), and establish that legislatures can be challenging venues in which to enact public health-related laws. We describe how, as the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene began to tackle modern public health problems (e.g., chronic diseases caused by food and tobacco), the regulatory power of its BOH was challenged.In an era when industry funds political causes and candidates, the weakening of the independence of rule-making boards of health, such as the NYC BOH, might result in illness and death.

Regulating drivers with epilepsy in Maryland: Results of the application of a United States consensus guideline.

OBJECTIVE: Driving regulations for people with seizures vary widely throughout the United States and the world. Maryland updated their guidelines in 2003 to reflect those of a U.S. consensus guideline requiring a minimum 3-month seizure-free period as well as an individual risk assessment by a Medical Advisory Board (MAB). This retrospective study provides the first analysis of outcomes after the implementation of the consensus guidelines and an assessment of their predictive validity through longitudinal outcome data. METHODS: MAB reviews and licensing records for Maryland driver applicants with seizures between 2004 and 2005 were reviewed, during which 254 first-time applicants were processed. The initial licensing decisions were assessed and the subsequent seizure recurrence and crash rates over the following 7 years were evaluated. RESULTS: The MAB approved driving for 74.8% of initial applicants; most had been seizure-free for over 6 months. Approved drivers had a longer median seizure-free period (563 days) compared to those who were denied (104.5 days, p < 0.01), and 22.7% of approved drivers had seizures recur during monitoring over the next year, although none resulted in crashes or deaths. Of applicants initially denied (n = 50), 89.3% were eventually licensed. Treating physicians recommended driving for 84.4% of applicants rejected by the MAB. SIGNIFICANCE: Maryland's individualized system for assessing driving applicants with seizures resulted in a dynamic process of approvals and denials based on favorable and unfavorable risk factors and lengths of seizure freedom. Seizure recurrences were comparable to internationally accepted rates. Over the course of monitoring, most applicants were eventually licensed. Treating physicians recommended that nearly all their patient applicants be permitted to drive, which raises safety concerns for the 10 states that rely solely on physician recommendations. Further assessment is needed of the risk factors deemed favorable and unfavorable by the U.S. consensus guidelines.

Exploring Legal Models to Preserve Catholicity.

As the structures of U.S. health systems evolve, a number of Catholic systems have found it necessary to transfer ownership of their hospitals to other-than-Catholic entities. In such cases, the selling sponsors have a key decision to make: Can the hospital maintain its Catholic identity after the sale?

BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE: CAN PHYSICIANS PRESCRIBE OPIOIDS TO TREAT PAIN ADEQUATELY WHILE AVOIDING LEGAL SANCTION?

Prescription opioids are an important tool for physicians in treating pain but also carry significant risks of harm when prescribed inappropriately or misused by patients or others. Recent increases in opioid-related morbidity and mortality has reignited scrutiny of prescribing practices by law enforcement, regulatory agencies, and state medical boards. At the same time, the predominant 4D model of misprescribers is outdated and insufficient; it groups physician misprescribers as dated, duped, disabled, or dishonest. The weaknesses and inaccuracies of the 4D model are explored, along with the serious consequences of its application. This Article calls for development of an evidence base in this area and suggests an alternate model of misprescribers, the 3C model, which more accurately characterizes misprescribers as careless, corrupt, or compromised by impairment.

Legislating collaborative self-regulation in Canada: A comparative policy analysis.

To encourage interprofessional collaboration and to improve the regulation of healthcare providers, Ontario and Nova Scotia, Canada, have each adopted legislation calling for collaboration among the regulators of their self-regulating health professions. Ontario's legislation is "top down": it came from government and stresses the obligation of regulators to collaborate. Nova Scotia's legislation is "bottom up": it was proposed and developed by regulators and emphasizes voluntary regulatory collaboration. This article considers the theoretical strengths and weaknesses of both models. It argues that Nova Scotia's approach may be stronger because of its relative consistency with core strengths of self-regulation and interprofessionalism and its grounding in soft law and a governance approach to collaborative self-regulation and to healthcare policy more broadly.

Nuevas recomendaciones para el consejo anticonceptivo basadas en el estilo de vida. Resultados de un estudio Delphi / New lifestyle-based recommendations for contraceptive counseling. A Delphi study

Objetivo. Elaborar un listado de condiciones más allá de las condiciones médicas de la OMS que puedan ayudar en la toma de decisiones durante el proceso de asesoría anticonceptiva. Métodos. Estudio Delphi en el que 27 expertos contestaron a 24 preguntas planteadas por los coordinadores del estudio. Se requirió un nivel de consenso igual o superior al 50% del total de expertos consultados en cada una de las preguntas con respuesta de escala nominal formulada. Resultados. Tras el proceso Delphi se realizaron 20 recomendaciones sobre cuestiones relacionadas con el consejo anticonceptivo: condiciones médicas, época de la vida, estilo de vida, estado laboral, nivel académico, nivel económico, actividad sexual, métodos anticonceptivos y cumplimiento con el régimen anticonceptivo. Conclusiones. El consejo anticonceptivo debe de contemplar, además de las condiciones médicas, los aspectos relacionados con el estilo de vida de la mujer para mejorar la adherencia al método anticonceptivo más adecuado (AU)

Objective. To present a list of factors that go beyond the medical conditions established by the World Health Organization to assist decision-making during the process of contraceptive counseling. Methods. A Delphi study was carried out, in which 27 experts responded to 24 questions posed by the study coordinators. At least 50% agreement among the experts on a nominal scale was required in each of the questions. Results. After the Delphi process, 20 recommendations were made on issues related to contraceptive counseling: medical conditions, stage of life, lifestyle, employment status, educational level, economic status, sexual activity, contraceptive methods and contraceptive adherence. Conclusions. In addition to medical conditions, contraceptive counseling should include issues related to women's lifestyles in order to improve adherence to the most appropriate contraceptive method (AU)

Assessing the role of regulatory bodies in managing health professional issues and errors in Europe.

OBJECTIVE: This paper explores how medical regulatory bodies in nine European countries manage professional issues involving quality and patient safety, to build on limited existing information on procedures for regulating medical professionals in Europe. DESIGN: Twelve vignettes describing scenarios of concerns about standards of physicians were developed, covering clinical, criminal and administrative matters. Medical regulatory bodies in nine European countries were asked what action they would normally take in each situation. Their responses were related to their regulatory mandate. RESULTS: Responses varied greatly across participating countries. Regulators are always involved where patients are at risk or where a criminal offence is committed within the clinical setting. Non-criminal medical issues were generally handled by the employer, if any, at their discretion. Countries varied in the use of punitive measures, the extent to which they took an interest in issues arising outside professional activities, and whether they dealt with issues themselves or referred cases to another regulatory authority or took no action at all. CONCLUSIONS: There is little consistency across Europe on the regulation of medical professionals. There is considerable diversity in the range of topics that regulatory bodies oversee, with almost all covering health care quality and safety and others encompassing issues related to reputation, respect and trust. These inconsistencies have significant implications for professional mobility, patient safety and quality of care.

Electronic and remote prescribing: administrative, regulatory, technical, and clinical standards and guidelines, April 2013.

This document recommends standards to be applied in a licensed prescriber's transition to electronic (e-prescribing) and remote prescribing. A perspective inherent in this document is that remote prescribing or telemedical e-prescribing can only be understood within the larger context of e-prescribing, a relatively new tool in the American healthcare toolkit. The purpose of this document is to inform and assist individuals and organizations in providing safe and effective e-prescribing and remote prescribing services on behalf of patients. A list of additional resources and a workflow for e-prescribing are offered as well.