Pub Date : 2020-12-01DOI: 10.30770/2572-1852-106.4.4
{"title":"News & Notes","authors":"","doi":"10.30770/2572-1852-106.4.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30770/2572-1852-106.4.4","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":91752,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical regulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49564723","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-01DOI: 10.30770/2572-1852-106.3.22
Marschall S. Smith
{"title":"The Interstate Medical Licensure Compact Commission: Growth, Success, and the Future","authors":"Marschall S. Smith","doi":"10.30770/2572-1852-106.3.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30770/2572-1852-106.3.22","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":91752,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical regulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47525981","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-01DOI: 10.30770/2572-1852-106.3.6
Michael C. Barnes, Taylor Kelly, Christopher M. Piemonte
The federal response to the U.S. drug overdose epidemic has largely focused on supply-reduction efforts. Yet, this response has led to serious consequences for patients, prescribers and the public. Specifically, demand-reduction activities have been inadequately prioritized and pursued, and supply-reduction efforts targeted at the prescribers of controlled medications have resulted in reluctance to prescribe medically necessary controlled medications, thereby compromising access to treatment. Meanwhile, overdose death rates have remained tragically high as unabated demand has yielded shifts in the supply of substances of abuse. This article reviews federal responses to the opioid crisis, examining the allocation of federal funding as well as the U.S. Department of Justice’s enforcement actions against health care providers. The article then provides recommendations for how state medical boards can be better utilized in responding to the overdose epidemic. These recommendations include requiring that state medical boards be the primary investigators of questions relating to medical need, allocating federal funding to state medical boards, instituting continuing medical education requirements for controlled medication prescribers and expanding screenings for problematic substance use.
{"title":"Demanding Better: A Case for Increased Funding and Involvement of State Medical Boards in Response to America’s Drug Abuse Crisis","authors":"Michael C. Barnes, Taylor Kelly, Christopher M. Piemonte","doi":"10.30770/2572-1852-106.3.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30770/2572-1852-106.3.6","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The federal response to the U.S. drug overdose epidemic has largely focused on supply-reduction efforts. Yet, this response has led to serious consequences for patients, prescribers and the public. Specifically, demand-reduction activities have been inadequately prioritized and pursued, and supply-reduction efforts targeted at the prescribers of controlled medications have resulted in reluctance to prescribe medically necessary controlled medications, thereby compromising access to treatment. Meanwhile, overdose death rates have remained tragically high as unabated demand has yielded shifts in the supply of substances of abuse. This article reviews federal responses to the opioid crisis, examining the allocation of federal funding as well as the U.S. Department of Justice’s enforcement actions against health care providers. The article then provides recommendations for how state medical boards can be better utilized in responding to the overdose epidemic. These recommendations include requiring that state medical boards be the primary investigators of questions relating to medical need, allocating federal funding to state medical boards, instituting continuing medical education requirements for controlled medication prescribers and expanding screenings for problematic substance use.","PeriodicalId":91752,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical regulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47411208","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-07-01DOI: 10.30770/2572-1852-106.2.17
{"title":"Report and Recommendations of the FSMB Workgroup on Physician Sexual Misconduct","authors":"","doi":"10.30770/2572-1852-106.2.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30770/2572-1852-106.2.17","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":91752,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical regulation","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43097291","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-04-01DOI: 10.30770/2572-1852-106.1.22
{"title":"State Member Board Briefs","authors":"","doi":"10.30770/2572-1852-106.1.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30770/2572-1852-106.1.22","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":91752,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical regulation","volume":"121 21","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141217487","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-04-01DOI: 10.30770/2572-1852-106.1.28
{"title":"International Briefs","authors":"","doi":"10.30770/2572-1852-106.1.28","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30770/2572-1852-106.1.28","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":91752,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical regulation","volume":" 1265","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141218352","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-11-04DOI: 10.30770/2572-1852-105.3.20
Peter Balestrieri, Thomas Mansfield
{"title":"Advice for Identifying, Recruiting and Training Medical Expert Witnesses in Quality of Care Cases","authors":"Peter Balestrieri, Thomas Mansfield","doi":"10.30770/2572-1852-105.3.20","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30770/2572-1852-105.3.20","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":91752,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical regulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46621731","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-11-04DOI: 10.30770/2572-1852-105.3.6
Kate Regnier, Kathy B. Chappell, Dimitra V. Travlos
For decades, health leadership organizations have identified interprofessional education and team-based care as a critical component of health care quality and safety. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) has issued a series of reports demonstrating the relationship between poor team performance and negative patient outcome and has called on accreditors, licensing and certifying bodies to use their oversight processes as levers for change. Toward that end, three of the national accreditors in medicine, nursing and pharmacy collaborated to create a unified accreditation system, setting standards for interprofessional continuing education (IPCE) and establishing an IPCE credit that designates activities planned by and for health care teams. There is evidence supporting the relationship between engagement in IPCE and improvements in health care professionals' knowledge, attitudes, competence and performance, as well as patient and system outcomes. The accreditors believe that this evidence base is strong enough to justify including IPCE in regulatory requirements. In 2018, the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) recognized IPCE credit as an additional means of satisfying CME requirements for medical license renewal. The increasing recognition of IPCE demonstrates the pivotal role of accreditors and regulators in driving the advancement of IPCE and team care now and in the future.
{"title":"The Role and Rise of Interprofessional Continuing Education","authors":"Kate Regnier, Kathy B. Chappell, Dimitra V. Travlos","doi":"10.30770/2572-1852-105.3.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30770/2572-1852-105.3.6","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 For decades, health leadership organizations have identified interprofessional education and team-based care as a critical component of health care quality and safety. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) has issued a series of reports demonstrating the relationship between poor team performance and negative patient outcome and has called on accreditors, licensing and certifying bodies to use their oversight processes as levers for change. Toward that end, three of the national accreditors in medicine, nursing and pharmacy collaborated to create a unified accreditation system, setting standards for interprofessional continuing education (IPCE) and establishing an IPCE credit that designates activities planned by and for health care teams. There is evidence supporting the relationship between engagement in IPCE and improvements in health care professionals' knowledge, attitudes, competence and performance, as well as patient and system outcomes. The accreditors believe that this evidence base is strong enough to justify including IPCE in regulatory requirements. In 2018, the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) recognized IPCE credit as an additional means of satisfying CME requirements for medical license renewal. The increasing recognition of IPCE demonstrates the pivotal role of accreditors and regulators in driving the advancement of IPCE and team care now and in the future.","PeriodicalId":91752,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical regulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44284380","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-11-04DOI: 10.30770/2572-1852-105.3.14
N. Varjavand, Cynthia Johnson, M. Greco, P. Duke
In the United States, clinically inactive physicians are asked to demonstrate refreshed skills and knowledge for relicensure or recredentialing. Limited data exists about these programs' outcomes and participants' perspectives. Our survey results from physicians who completed a reentry preceptorship program in the United States will help better guide how programs can be tailored to fit reentry physicians' goals. Physicians who completed a reentry program between November 2006 and April 2013 were asked to complete an anonymous survey, with 50 of 64 physicians responding (78% response rate). Most were men, 41–59 years of age, board certified, self-referred, unemployed, with an active medical license, and reporting a median eight years of clinical inactivity. Physicians' top three goals for participating in the program were clinical employment, regaining their medical license, and refreshing their skills. A majority (n=37, 74%) achieved their primary goal within a year of program completion. Most reported that the course prepared them for their current work and resolved challenges of reentry, including improvement in their confidence, medical knowledge and clinical skills. This is the first paper looking at returning physicians' perspectives about their refresher/reentry program experience and outcomes. This survey helps reentry programs better understand their participants' views to provide valuable training, mentoring and placement counseling.
{"title":"Physician Reentry: Results of a Post-Program Survey","authors":"N. Varjavand, Cynthia Johnson, M. Greco, P. Duke","doi":"10.30770/2572-1852-105.3.14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30770/2572-1852-105.3.14","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In the United States, clinically inactive physicians are asked to demonstrate refreshed skills and knowledge for relicensure or recredentialing. Limited data exists about these programs' outcomes and participants' perspectives. Our survey results from physicians who completed a reentry preceptorship program in the United States will help better guide how programs can be tailored to fit reentry physicians' goals. Physicians who completed a reentry program between November 2006 and April 2013 were asked to complete an anonymous survey, with 50 of 64 physicians responding (78% response rate). Most were men, 41–59 years of age, board certified, self-referred, unemployed, with an active medical license, and reporting a median eight years of clinical inactivity. Physicians' top three goals for participating in the program were clinical employment, regaining their medical license, and refreshing their skills. A majority (n=37, 74%) achieved their primary goal within a year of program completion. Most reported that the course prepared them for their current work and resolved challenges of reentry, including improvement in their confidence, medical knowledge and clinical skills. This is the first paper looking at returning physicians' perspectives about their refresher/reentry program experience and outcomes. This survey helps reentry programs better understand their participants' views to provide valuable training, mentoring and placement counseling.","PeriodicalId":91752,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical regulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44359989","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-08-15DOI: 10.30770/2572-1852-105.2.24
Catherine M. Welcher, Carrie L. Radabaugh, A. Aparicio, H. Chaudhry, Mark L. Staz, L. Kirk, Linda R. Bresnahan
This article considers concerns about the presence and phrasing of questions on physician licensing applications related to mental health, substance abuse, and leave from practice. These questions may discourage physicians from seeking appropriate treatment due to fear of stigmatization, public disclosure, and career effects related to licensing or credentialing concerns. Accessible and affordable resources and programs are needed to allow physicians to seek treatment in a non-punitive, confidential manner. The authors discuss how some state medical boards have taken steps to address barriers that prevent licensees from seeking help and review the work of the Federation of State Medical Boards Workgroup on Physician Wellness and Burnout, which addressed concerns about physician wellness, burnout, and suicide prevention. Physician health programs also have begun to intervene in areas related to mental and physical health and are providing confidential and professional support. Additionally, medical schools, hospitals, and medical societies have increased their focus on mental health by implementing programs and offering resources to help students and physicians improve their overall health. Raising awareness about the importance of physician wellness has inherent value to physicians and the public and ultimately contributes to patient safety and the health of our nation.
{"title":"Programs and Resources to Alleviate Concerns with Mental Health Disclosures on Physician Licensing Applications","authors":"Catherine M. Welcher, Carrie L. Radabaugh, A. Aparicio, H. Chaudhry, Mark L. Staz, L. Kirk, Linda R. Bresnahan","doi":"10.30770/2572-1852-105.2.24","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30770/2572-1852-105.2.24","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article considers concerns about the presence and phrasing of questions on physician licensing applications related to mental health, substance abuse, and leave from practice. These questions may discourage physicians from seeking appropriate treatment due to fear of stigmatization, public disclosure, and career effects related to licensing or credentialing concerns. Accessible and affordable resources and programs are needed to allow physicians to seek treatment in a non-punitive, confidential manner. The authors discuss how some state medical boards have taken steps to address barriers that prevent licensees from seeking help and review the work of the Federation of State Medical Boards Workgroup on Physician Wellness and Burnout, which addressed concerns about physician wellness, burnout, and suicide prevention. Physician health programs also have begun to intervene in areas related to mental and physical health and are providing confidential and professional support. Additionally, medical schools, hospitals, and medical societies have increased their focus on mental health by implementing programs and offering resources to help students and physicians improve their overall health. Raising awareness about the importance of physician wellness has inherent value to physicians and the public and ultimately contributes to patient safety and the health of our nation.","PeriodicalId":91752,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical regulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48237853","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：