Everyone should review this free article in NEJM from the CEO of the ACCME. Clearly profit oriented propaganda for ACCME and MOC! I encourage EVERYONE to make a comment on this article! My comment is as follows-hopefully will be published!
This article is concerning. It is free advertisement for the ACCME (a $12 million gross receipts a year “business”) as well as the increasingly suspicious ABMS MOC industry (earning over $400 million cumulatively each year) . The most recent IRS 990 form from 2014 lists the CEO salary at over $450K annually-whereby Graham McMahon is also listed as “principal officer” in 2014, yet without indication that any money was paid. This is 2016, He is CEO. Anyone reading this article MUST recognize it as a free advertisement for corporate products. While such “public service” to physicians is given 501-c tax free status, we must all recognize that physicians are forced to buy these products. True competition does not exist with such 501-c corporate monopolies! These monopolies are historic legacies and deserve serious consideration in this millennium, even though the AMA support reached back 100 years!
It is time to review the many corporate monopolies extorting payments from physicians without FREE choice! YES, changes to post graduate education must ELIMINATE extortion of physicians to learn from corporate products. Non-profits must start offering FREE service or lose exempt status!!!
Dr. Carlisle Holland sent us a look at the history of Osteopathic board certification:
I was a professor at TCOM during the period when board certification in general-family practice and OMM were developed. Even then, there was discussion about whether or not such certifications could be used against physicians to deny or restrict privileges to practice or gain privileges to use some hospitals. During that period the AMA was still denying full reciprocity with DOs and DO post-doc education programs, so our profession created boards that were of comparable academic rigor to be certain that DO boards were at a parity with MD boards in specialties, BUT with the recognized need to include Osteopathic information and practice methods in addition to the MD material.
Paul Kempen, MD, PhD passes along correspondence with Lehigh Valley Health Network, Dept. of Anes. Chair Dr. McLoughlin with a short intro:
Just this week, Lance Talmage as Chairman of the FSMB board indicated that “300,000 physicians” are currently enrolled in MOC-as a very supportive statement. With over 850,000 docs in the USA this documents a small 37% acceptance! This needs to be advertised. It is time for the ABMS tyranny to be “irrelevant”!
Dear Dr McLoughlin:
Please consider the fact that Grandfather recertification is a non-starter, with well below 10% compliance to date. As the ABMS and the ABIM continue to push all 24 affiliates to subscribe to their demands, physicians are beginning to lose employment secondary to certification expirations. This is a real problem faced with the “physician shortage and baby boomer onslaught”. As “MOC compliance” becomes the “new standard” under ABMS tyranny, everyone becomes extorted into “compliance” or retirement. At the same time, non-physicians are being given the right to practice medicine and anesthesia, also outside the state board oversight. Some highly-trained nurses in Minnesota will no longer be required to have a physician supervise their work. Gov. Mark Dayton has signed a bill that gives advanced practice registered nurses the authority to practice independently.The licensing change, which takes effect Jan. 1, applies to nurse-midwives, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists and registered nurse anesthetists. That makes Minnesota the ninth state to grant full practice and prescribing autonomy to all four categories of advanced practice nurses.
The official journal of the International Anesthesia Research Society, Anesthesia and Analgesia has published Dr. Paul Kempen’s (M.D., Ph.D.) comprehensive review of “Maintenance of Certification and Licensure: Regulatory Capture of Medicine” in Vol. 118. No. 6, June 2014 edition.
I grew up in a blue collar inner city “broken home,” and worked continuously from age 14 onward. I paid my way through catholic high school and public university, learning German as a premedical prerequisite. Financial aid allowed me to go to Germany as a “Junior Year Abroad” student. I was admitted after 1 semester into a premier medical program of the Albert Ludwig Universität Freiburg, founded in 1457, completing my American Bachelor of Science in Biology in Germany over the next 3 semesters. I then traveled to New Zealand for medical externship for 6 months.
As a medical student, I was qualified to work as a nurse after completing a 2-month rotation in clinical nursing as required by my program. During my semester breaks, I often worked 11-hour shifts as a night nurse on the surgical ward. My record was 30 consecutive 11-hour night shifts. This work, along with periodic red cell and plasma donations, allowed me to finance my medical study in Europe.
Ms. Carol A. Thoma
American Osteopathic Board of Family Physicians
330 E. Algonquin Road, Suite 6
Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005
RE: AOA # 064509
I am in receipt of the American Osteopathic Board of Family Physicians letter from you dated May 14th, 2014 indicating that I have passed both cognitive and practical re-certifications in Osteopathic Family Medicine and Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment, and that my certificate re-certification period will be from January 1st, 2015 to December 31st., 2022, a period of eight years only.
I am writing to inquire if the OCC, the Osteopathic Continuous Certification process is required to keep my Ohio Medical license. Continue reading →
I find these comments on this thread quite interesting—-Marilyn as a regulator and as a lawyer, are you advising that all lawyers retake the Bar exam every year or two? If not are you advising that the federal government mandate that lawyers take a national certification or recertification exam? How about architects, engineers, nurses and other professionals? Every time testing goes on there is a pro and a con, a cost and a benefit——where does the money come from to pay for this? If there were proven benefit, we all could have a different discussion, but there is no scientifically proven benefit—-only cost. Lawyers are trained to argue based on law and interpretation of the law; doctors argue based on scientific fact. Doctors opine based on scientific fact, pros and cons, risks and benefits. MOC has never been proven to be beneficial but it does have real costs. Some of those costs are non economic and are harmful to the medical profession. There are decreased attendance to educational meetings that are more relevant to those individuals practice, there is decreased comradery and decreased time for physicians to read/study articles that apply to their specific patient populations. America has a very diverse population—-one size does not fit all. Do you think that all women should only buy a size “4″ pair of jeans? All men drive the same kind of car? Nobody should be uncivil. The tone that we all pick up from the thread is obviously one of anger and frustration. As a lawyer and defender of peoples rights, I can not figure out why you would defend MOC. It is a one size fits all program that has never been proven to improve the quality of care. It takes away individual freedom of physicians who have sought varied approved ways to keep current and it is weakening the profession of medicine by destroying other long proven quality CME programs and meetings.
We the patients demand a reassessment of the status quo.
The American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) Inc/American Osteopathic Association Bureau of Osteopathic Specialists (AOABOS) are not-for-profit Company’s that provides “Board Certification” of physicians on a voluntary basis. The ABMS/AOABOS are autonomous corporation(s) that maintains no “proof of performance” requirements and are subject to neither accountability nor oversight.
Dr. Bob Maurer’s response to a colleague asking this question:
They are not crazy. They are power hungry. The AOA leaders and the ACOFP leaders are driven by their own feeling of importance and by their own personal ambition to move up the ladder in their respective organizations.
With their promotion of MOC, OCC, MOL, PQRS, CAP, COMLEX, ACA, Needs Assessment, and other requirements, they have completely lost sight of their mission…which should be to represent the private practicing osteopathic physicians.