Just in the nick of time, the Council of Medical Specialty Societies (CMSS), another (smaller) member of the Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) that represents medical specialty societies, issued its public comment on the ABMS Vision Commission Draft Report on Maintenance (and Continuous) Certification on the last day the Commission is taking comments.
What is important is not only what the Specialty Societies said in the statement, but what they did not say.
WHAT THEY DID SAY
That initial certification and continuing certification are two separate products offered by ABMS and their member boards and have “different purposes.” Specialty societies are in support of initial certification and the value of a secure examination for that purpose. The recognition that boards have a responsibility to “inform organizations that continuous certification should not be the only criterion in these decisions” and further “encourage hospitals, health systems, payers, and other health care organizations to not deny credentialing or certification to a physician solely on the basis of certification status.” They had “serious concerns” with four issues: Use of high-stakes, summative examinations as part of continuing certification The practice improvement component The role clarity between certifying boards and specialty societies The timeline for implementation. They likened the issue of trying to improve ongoing assessment of physician competence to “trying to change the tire on a moving car.” It was clear the specialty societies wanted to divorce themselves from the “assessment” side of continuous certification to the kinder and gentler “learning” side of “continuous certification.” And it looks like the specialty societies want to leverage the ABIM’s earlier definition of “professionalism” created by the ABIM Foundation to leverage their own social justice imperative to participate in continuous certification, rather than just that needed by ABMS. They acknowledge the high degree of physician burnout and the need to implement their recommendations in a timely manner. They raised the “grandfather” and “grandmother” issue and voiced strong wording that the ABMS better not to mess with that exclusion, less the “grandfathers” at the specialty societies have to participate in continuous certification, too. They thank the Commission and “require further collaboration and discussion prior to implementation.”WHAT THEY DO NOT SAY
In my opinion (as I’ve said all along), Maintenance of Certification was a clever shell game used to force physician purchase of a product created by American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM). That product is far beyond any imposed by states to maintain licensure and requirements for Continuing Medical Education. MOC was rebranded and modified on multiple occasions by ABMS and its member boards to generate continuous cash flow to the ABMS member boards (and now specialty societies) without proof of its value to patients.
Without acknowledging and dealing with the corrupt realities of the MOC (and continuous certification), the recommendations issued by CMSS in their comment letter should be rendered moot.
-Wes
Please give generously to our legal fund to end this corrupt educational product nationwide.
Share this Post