Physician Satisfaction With and Practice Changes Resulting From American Board of Family Medicine Maintenance of Certification Performance in Practice Modules

E-learning Interventions for Quality Improvement Continuing Medical Education-A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

Improving health care quality and patient safety are top priorities for the medical field. Robust continuing medical education (CME) programs represent major interventions to effectively teach quality improvement (QI) principles to practicing physicians. In particular, eLearning, a term describing online and distance learning interventions using digital tools, provides a means for CME interventions to reach broader audiences. Although there has been a focus on CME addressing QI, no knowledge synthesis has focused specifically on eLearning interventions. The purpose of this review was to examine the current landscape of eLearning interventions in QI-focused CME.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review using the framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley as revised by Levac. We searched five databases and identified 2467 prospective publications, which two authors independently screened for inclusion. From each included article, two authors independently extracted data on the instructional modalities and QI tools used and met regularly to achieve consensus.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were included. Most studies used blended instruction (n = 12) rather than solely eLearning interventions. Salient findings included the importance of coaching from QI experts and institutional support for planning and implementing eLearning interventions. Lack of protected time and resources for participants were identified as barriers to participation in CME activities, with small practices being disproportionately affected.

DISCUSSION

Partnerships between CME developers and sponsoring organizations are vital in creating sustainable eLearning interventions for QI-focused CME. Remote coaching can be an effective strategy to provide ongoing support to geographically separated learners.

Doctors' attitudes to maintenance of professional competence: A scoping review

CONTEXT

Recent decades have seen the international implementation of programmes aimed at assuring the continuing competence of doctors. Maintenance of Professional Competence (MPC) programmes aim to encourage doctors' lifelong learning and ensure high-quality, safe patient care; however, programme requirements can be perceived as bureaucratic and irrelevant to practice, leading to disengagement. Doctors' attitudes and beliefs about MPC are critical to translating regulatory requirements into committed and effective lifelong learning. We aimed to summarise knowledge about doctors' attitudes to MPC to inform the development of MPC programmes and identify under-researched areas.

METHODS

We undertook a scoping review following Arksey and O'Malley, including sources of evidence about doctors' attitudes to MPC in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Ireland, and using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) as a guide.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-five sources of evidence were included in the review. One hundred and two were peer-reviewed publications, and 23 were reports. Most were from the United Kingdom or the United States and used quantitative or mixed methods. There was agreement across jurisdictions that MPC is a good idea in theory but doubt that it achieves its objectives in practice. Attitudes to the processes of MPC, and their impact on learning and practice were mixed. The lack of connection between MPC and practice was a recurrent theme. Barriers to participation were lack of time and resources, complexity of the requirements and a lack of flexibility in addressing doctors' personal and professional circumstances.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the picture that emerged is that doctors are supportive of the concept of MPC but have mixed views on its processes. We highlight implications for research and practice arising from these findings.

Professional satisfaction of family physicians working in primary healthcare centers: A comparison of two Saudi regions

Introduction

As a new healthcare market force and first point of contact, family physicians (FPs) play a key role in healthcare delivery system. It is vital to understand issues that affect performance and satisfaction with their practices and working environment. The objectives of this study are to assess the level of professional satisfaction and to compare and identify the factors potentially associated with professional satisfaction/dissatisfaction among FPs of two regions.

Materials and Methods

A comparative cross-sectional study on FPs working in primary healthcare centers under Ministry of Health was conducted in two regions (Jeddah and Eastern region) to assess job satisfaction and dissatisfaction among them. Validated close-ended questionnaire was emailed. Overall satisfaction along with the associated factors was identified. Chi-square and multivariate regression analyses were performed to test the association between job satisfaction and predictors.

Results

A total of 237 FPs completed the survey and an overall 62% of them were satisfied. Male doctors were less in number yet more satisfied (71%). FPs of eastern region were slightly more satisfied (63.4%) when compared with 59.2% of Jeddah. Factors significantly associated with professional dissatisfaction included FPs having the opinion that they were not respected by community members [odds ratio (OR) 2.7, confidence interval (CI): 1.24-5.97, P = 0.012] and FPs' own perception of being inferior to other specialties (OR 13.59, CI: 4.98-37.07, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

More than half of the FPs were professionally satisfied; however, the majority had perception of being inferior to other specialties. Improving self-esteem, working environment, and addressing other identified factors for dissatisfaction can help FPs overcome their stresses, leading to better healthcare delivery.

Can Maintenance of Certification Work? Associations of MOC and Improvements in Physicians' Knowledge and Practice

PURPOSE

To summarize the findings of studies, conducted by individuals both internal and external to the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) Member Boards, of the associations of Maintenance of Certification (MOC) and improvements in physicians' knowledge and patient care processes or outcomes.

METHOD

The authors conducted a narrative review of studies identified by searching PubMed and Web of Science for English-language articles from the United States published between 2000 and May 2017. To be included, articles had to examine the relationship of MOC to physician knowledge, clinical practice processes, or patient care outcomes. The initial search yielded 811 articles. After two rounds of review and excluding those articles that did not fit the study criteria, 39 articles were included for analysis.

RESULTS

The 39 included studies were conducted by or included diplomates of 12 ABMS Member Boards. Twenty-two studies examined MOC processes that were developed by an ABMS Board; 17 examined interventions that were developed by nonboard entities but accepted for MOC credit by an ABMS Board. Thirty-eight studies examined a single component of MOC; 24 studied the improvement in medical practice component. Thirty-seven studies reported at least one positive outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the studies included in this review highlighted circumstances in which MOC was associated with positive impacts on physician knowledge and patient care processes or outcomes. Future collaborative research is needed to improve the relevance, helpfulness, and generalizability of continuing certification to different physicians across specialties and practice settings.

What Family Physicians Really Think of Maintenance of Certification Part II Activities

INTRODUCTION

This study examines how improving curricular content and technical interface issues could make maintenance of certification activities more meaningful to American Board of Family Medicine diplomates completing Maintenance of Certification for Family Physicians (MC-FP) Program self-assessment modules (SAMs).

METHODS

We used a sequential exploratory design to analyze quantitative and qualitative data from 320,500 surveys of family physicians who completed a SAM between January 2004 and April 2013. This included numeric rating scales and free text comments. Basic statistical rankings, template-based automated coding, and emergent coding were used to analyze SAM experience and identify thematic content.

RESULTS

Across SAMs, numeric ratings were universally high and positive free text comments outnumbered negative comments two to one. When comparing feedback on the knowledge assessment and clinical simulation (CS) activities, SAMs were rated less favorably when the frequency of ideas identified by participants as most prevalent in one activity mismatched those identified as most prevalent in the companion activity. Participants were also critical of navigation issues, technical issues, and a lack of realness in the CS activity.

DISCUSSION

Whether analyzed through quantitative data, qualitative data, or mixed methods, a large majority of participants rated their experience with SAMs highly. When individual SAMs were rated poorly, it seemed to be due to discordance in ideas emphasized between the knowledge assessment and CS components, or an opinion regarding the SAM topic that existed independent of the SAM process.

Recognized focused practice: Does sub-specialty designation offer value to the neurosurgeon?

Vehicles for life-long assessment such as Maintenance of Certification tend to focus on generalist neurosurgical knowledge. However, as neurosurgeons advance in their careers, they tend to narrow their practice and increase volumes in certain specific types of operations. Failing to test the type of procedures most relevant to the practitioner is a lost opportunity to improve the knowledge and practice of the individual neurosurgeon. In this study, we assess the neurosurgical community’s appetite for designations of board-recognized Recognized Focused Practice (RFP). We administered a validated, online, confidential survey to 4,899 neurosurgeons (2,435 American Board of Neurological Surgery (ABNS) Diplomates participating in MOC, 1,440 Diplomates certified prior to 1999 (grandfathered), and 1,024 retired Diplomates). We received 1,449 responses overall (30% response rate). A plurality of respondents were in practice 11–15 years (18.5%), in private practice (40%) and participate in MOC (61%). 49% of respondents felt that a RFP designation would not be helpful. For the 30% who felt that RFP would be helpful, 61.3% felt that it would support recognition by their hospital or practice, it would motivate them to stay current on medical knowledge (53.4%), or it would help attract patients (46.4%;). The most popular suggestions for RFP were Spine (56.2%), Cerebrovascular (62.9%), Pediatrics (64.1%), and Functional/Stereotactic (52%). A plurality of neurosurgeons (35.7%) felt that RFP should recognize neurosurgeons with accredited and non-accredited fellowship experience and sub-specialty experience. Ultimately, Recognized Focused Practice may provide value to individual neurosurgeons, but the neurosurgical community shows tepid interest for pursuing this designation.

A Survey of Perceived Effectiveness of Part 4 Maintenance of Certification

OBJECTIVES

Evaluative assessment is needed to inform improvement of Part 4 Maintenance of Certification (MOC), a large-scale program that aims to improve physician knowledge, engagement, and skills in quality improvement (QI). We sought to determine if Part 4 MOC participation improves perceived educational and clinical outcomes by piloting a new physician survey.

METHODS

We administered a new online survey (MOC Practice, Engagement, Attitude, and Knowledge Survey) to physicians at the beginning and end of a Part 4 MOC project sponsored by a pediatric hospital's American Board of Medical Specialties' portfolio program during 2015. Participants worked in academic and community settings and in various accredited specialties. The main outcome was change in survey response on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = best) for 3 learning domains (QI engagement and attitude; QI method application, and improved patient care).

RESULTS

Of 123 complete responses and a 97% response rate, mean baseline responses were positive or neutral (2.2, 2.3, 1.9, respectively). Responses improved in QI engagement and attitude (-0.15, z score = -2.78, P = .005), QI method application (-0.39, z score = -7.364, P < .005), and improved patient care (-0.11, z score = -1.728, P = .084).

CONCLUSIONS

A Part 4 MOC physician survey provides valuable data to evaluate and improve the learning activity. In this children's hospital program, physicians view Part 4 favorably. Participation was associated with modest improvements in perceptions of QI engagement and attitude, application of QI methods, and patient care. Systematic evaluation of all Part 4 MOC projects and programs has the potential to improve the program nationally.

Physician Perceptions of Performance Feedback in a Quality Improvement Activity

Physician performance and peer comparison feedback can affect physician care quality and patient outcomes. This study aimed to understand family physician perspectives of the value of performance feedback in quality improvement (QI) activities. This study analyzed American Board of Family Medicine open-ended survey data collected between 2004 and 2014 from physicians who completed a QI module that provided pre- and post-QI project individual performance data and peer comparisons. Physicians made 3480 comments in response to a question about this performance feedback, which were generally positive in nature (86%). Main themes that emerged were importance of accurate feedback data, enhanced detail in the content of feedback, and ability to customize peer comparison groups to compare performance to peers with similar patient populations or practice characteristics. Meaningful and tailored performance feedback may be an important tool for physicians to improve their care quality and should be considered an integral part of QI project design.