Recent Trends in Continuing Medical Education Among Obstetrician–Gynecologists

A abstract of arecent article in Obstetrics & Gynecology (May 2011 – Volume 117 – Issue 5 – pp 1060-1064. Burwick, Richard M. MD, MPH; Schulkin, Jay PhD; Cooley, Sarah W.; Janakiraman, Vanitha MD; Norwitz, Errol R. MD, PhD; Robinson, Julian N. MD) reports on a study conducted “To estimate current trends in continuing medical education among obstetrician–gynecologists in relation to the Maintenance of Certification program.”

A validated questionnaire was mailed to 1,030 randomly selected physicians of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in the United States, Puerto Rico, and Canada. Participants were asked about current practices and opinions regarding continuing medical education activities. Responses were compared between members mandated for Maintenance of Certification (board certification 1986 or later; time-limited certificate) or not (board certification

Some interesting results were provided:

1. College physicians mandated to participate in the Maintenance of Certification program were more likely to rely on Annual Board Certification articles as a major source of continuing medical education credits compared with those not requiring Maintenance of Certification
2. Maintenance of Certification requirement led to decreased use of the national or international meetings and self-selected continuing medical education materials as sources of continuing medical education credits.
3. Physicians in both groups equally valued:

• the relevance of Annual Board Certification articles
• the importance of content at academic meetings
• the usefulness of simulation drills and
• the general ability of continuing medical education activities to improve skills as a physician

As for conclusions it appears that the:

1. requirement of the Maintenance of Certification program has led to significant changes in continuing medical education choices by obstetrician–gynecologists, and,
2. changes in continuing medical education appear related to mandated obligations rather than personal preference.

A subscription is required to access the article so I didn’t see the survey or other results reported. I don’t know if any questions were included and results reported about the performance improvement component of the MOC process.

I find it a little distressing that the changes reported appear to be less matter of personal preference and more related to mandated obligations. I am not sure what to make of this. What do you think?

Physian Performance and Quality – No Relationship?

“Performance improvement” CME

I found on a Blog called Trusted MD. It is syndicated by R. W. Donnell | Mon, 04/18/2011

It is a response to a comment by Daniel Carlat a few days ago.
about the emerging importance of PI CME.

He says, “I knew we were moving in this direction but I was not aware that “PI CME” was official. Dan Carlat blogged this yesterday. As one would expect he’s mainly concerned about industry getting in on the trend, but between the lines of his post I read a measure of concern about the whole idea of PI CME. I’m concerned too. Performance has little to do with quality, or good doctoring by any definition.”

Unbelievable!  What physicians do – their performance – has little to do with quality, or good doctoring”? I completely understand there are many determinants of quality and good “doctoring”. To assert that what physicians do -their performance- in patient care has no impact on quality is unfathomable to me.