Keeping state medical boards alive

» Discuss Article    (1 Comment)

This is where state medical boards come in. Each is charged with protecting patients by ensuring that laws governing medical practice are being followed. The overwhelming majority of physicians perform their duties with the utmost care and competence. Unfortunately, there are times when physicians perform poorly or in an unlawful manner. In those cases, it is the job of state medical boards to appropriately discipline offenders.

Medical boards sanction physicians in many ways. Lower levels of discipline, such as a public letter of reprimand or a fine, are often enough to stop problem behavior and preempt problems in the future. Or a board may order a physician to obtain needed training in a particular area of practice, limiting him from practicing a certain procedure until he has demonstrated competence in the area. A less serious disciplinary action is still action. It still requires medical board resources and can be just as effective a tool in protecting the public.

Medical boards also frequently preempt future disciplinary action through education and rehabilitation programs. These methods effectively protect the public while often salvaging an increasingly valuable commodity -- physicians -- for our communities.

These forms of discipline aren't reflected in annual ranking reports. Ironically, a medical board that reduces the number of "bad" doctors in a state through highly effective remediation and education would rank low in a ranking report -- because it had so few bad doctors to "seriously" discipline.

Today, we are asking the organizations that rank medical boards to set aside their rankings and work with us on an issue crucial to public protection: adequate funding and staffing for medical boards.

Medical boards are typically funded by the licensure fees they collect when physicians renew their licenses. Unfortunately, in some states these revenues are diverted into a general fund, rather than going directly back to the medical board. Medical boards then must compete with other state programs to obtain adequate funding, too often receiving a diminished share of physician licensing fees. As a result, many medical boards do not have enough investigators, attorneys and support staff to properly carry out investigations -- significantly impeding their ability to prosecute cases in a timely manner.

Patient protection must be a top priority for state legislators. Adequate funding and staffing for medical boards is in the best interest of all healthcare consumers. We encourage these consumer advocacy groups to join us in our mission to strengthen our medical boards and provide greater protection for the patients of all our states.

James N. Thompson is president and chief executive of the Federation of State Medical Boards.

Blowback is an online forum for full-length responses to our articles, editorials and Op-Eds. Click here to read more about Blowback, or submit your own by e-mailing us at opinionla@latimes.com.