Feature

Final ‘Vision’ report addresses MOC woes


 

The commission’s final report incorporates a number of changes that physicians offered based on a draft version of the report.

The American College of Physicians commented that it “objects to the use of data regarding quality measures for individual diplomate certification status, because physician-level measures of quality are flawed, and because physician-level data inevitably leads to physician-level documentation burden. Flawed performance measures also often inadequately adjust for patient comorbidities and socioeconomic status, which leads to assessments that do not reflect the actual quality of care.”

Similarly, the American Society of Hematology noted in a statement that it “disagrees with the commission’s recommendation to retain the reporting of practice improvement activities as part of continuous certification due to direct and indirect costs needed to fulfill this requirement on top of requirements for engagement in quality improvement mandated by insurers, institutions, and health systems.”

While the draft report recommended that specialty boards provide aggregated feedback to medical societies, a more individualized dissemination on the gaps in knowledge would be more helpful, according to Doug Henley, MD, CEO of the American Academy of Family Physicians, who said that a more individualized approach would help his organization better provide CME to its members to help fill in the knowledge gaps.

“If we can identify these and use other processes and then target at the individual level to seek improvement, I think that will be a better outcome rather than just x learners don’t do well in diabetic care,” he said in an interview. “That doesn’t really help me in terms of who needs the real education in diabetic care versus who needs it for heart failure.”

The final recommendation notes that ABMS member boards “must collaborate with professional and/or CME/CPD organizations to share data and information to guide and support diplomate engagement in continuing certification.”

The document further clarifies that the boards should examine “the aggregated results from assessments to identify knowledge, skills, and other competency gaps,” and the aggregated data should be shared with specialty societies, CME/CPD providers, quality improvement professionals, and other health care organizations.

One weakness in the draft noted by Dr. Henley was the lack of a more forceful tone within the recommendations. Even though AMBS is not bound by its recommendations, he said that he would like to see stronger language throughout the document.

Pages

Recommended Reading

Survey: Health care costs, access unlikely to improve in 2019
MDedge Cardiology
Fund projects, not people to address gender bias in research funding
MDedge Cardiology
ONC aims to help docs, patients with information sharing in proposed rule
MDedge Cardiology
How are you at coping with transparency?
MDedge Cardiology
Culture change needed to improve gender inequalities in medicine
MDedge Cardiology
Disruptive behavior on the job linked to depression, burnout
MDedge Cardiology
McAneny: Transparency needed for meaningful talk on drug pricing
MDedge Cardiology
Complementary and alternative medicine
MDedge Cardiology
Health spending: Boomers will spike costs, but growing uninsured will soften their impact
MDedge Cardiology
Lawsuit against ABIM draws $200,000 in donation support
MDedge Cardiology