Support our online development, and advance our onground research initiatives in free market economics, as we seek to showcase the brightest Next-Gen minds.
********************************************************************
THE ME-P DISCLAIMER: Posts, comments and all opinions do not necessarily represent iMBA, Inc. Copyright © 2006 to-date.
A Brief History
By Eric A. Dover MD
The first medical board was established in Connecticut in 1792 by the state legislature. It consisted of a group of physicians who evaluated the competency of physicians wishing to practice in the State. Medical Boards eventually evolved and became very powerful with the addition of Medical Practice Acts containing a plethora of administrative rules. The Medical Boards stated mission was, and still is, the protection, health and safety of the public. State Boards formed a national group, the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB), in 1912. The FSMB was the first institution to publically list names of disciplined physicians in a monthly bulletin.
In the 1980’s and 1990’s there were a number of high profile cases involving physicians and public safety. One such case, international in scope, concerned surgeon Dr. Jayant Patel. Significant news coverage regarding his surgical outcomes and knowledge resulted in the heightened questioning of Medical Boards and whether they were actually fulfilling their mission of protecting public health and safety. The Oregon Medical Board (OMB) was scrutinized for allegedly “ignoring” 79 complaints, and at least three deaths, attributed to Dr. Patel’s surgical care from 1989 to 1998. The OMB abdicated all responsibility for the situation with a myriad of excuses for why they had no control over this physician or the HMO he worked for.
OMB
The OMB then came to the state legislature with a “fix” to supposedly prevent any further such incidents. The OMB advocated for greater authority over physicians and greater independence from government oversight. With the din of the press and public, the Oregon Legislature gladly granted the OMB their wish. Other states followed Oregon’s example. Not a single individual associated with the OMB, whether administrative or board member was investigated in any meaningful way for their horrendous dereliction of duty. Not one of them had their license restricted, suspended or revoked for such serious offenses. None of them were ordered to pay out of pocket to go to “programs” for competency evaluations, psychological examinations or “courses” to help them become better board members. No one resigned, nor was anyone dismissed, from their position of power. The OMB’s inaction led to a number of deaths and numerous patients with chronic post-surgical medical disorders, yet all individuals involved with the OMB were protected from malpractice lawsuits
Case examples
With cases such as Dr. Patel’s featured prominently in the mainstream media, Medical Boards nationwide came under intense public pressure and scrutiny as it became clear they were not fulfilling their mission of protecting the public’s health and safety. The public saw physicians as a privileged class, protected by their colleagues and Medical Boards. They were correct to a degree. Public safety groups like Public Citizen, who had been taking Medical Boards, hospitals and large clinics to task for years regarding what they felt was a lack of physician oversight and discipline, began ranking state medical boards based on how many disciplinary actions they handed out each year. In their 2011 report, Public Citizen’s Health Research Group Ranking of the Rate of State Medical Boards’ Serious Disciplinary Actions, 2009-2011, the authors made the erroneous assumption that the greater the number of physician “disciplines” (actions) per 1000 physicians, the better job that State’s Medical Board was doing. Therefore, at 6.79 actions per 1000 physicians, Wyoming was doing the “best” job and at 1.33 actions per 1000 physicians, South Carolina was doing the “worst” job.
Medical boards vary state -2- state
Medical Boards vary remarkably from state to state. There are only two constants among them. First, each state has a Medical Board. Second, the Board makes all final decisions concerning licensees. Otherwise, there’s no consistency when it comes to what’s sandwiched in between. The Medical Board’s authority is grounded in the States Medical Practice Act, which gives them the authority to enforce laws for licensing, monitoring and disciplining physicians in the state. Every state has its own unique laws and processes, but every medical practice act covers the basics regarding oversight of physicians practicing medicine in the State.
Assessment
The U.S. Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) periodically issues guidelines on the essential elements of a medical practice act.
Conclusion
Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, urls and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.
Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.
Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com
Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, I.T, business and policy management ecosystem.
***
Share this:
Filed under: Career Development, Ethics, Risk Management | Tagged: A Brief History of Medical Boards, Eric A. Dover MD |
Leave a Reply