Protecting the Public: State Medical Board Licensure Policies for Active and Inactive Physicians

Abstract

The number of inactive physicians in the United States is growing. Currently, state medical board policies do not address the issue of continuing competence in license renewal. Greater medical safety concerns on the part of the public will likely lead to calls for greater accountability by state licensing authorities.

A national survey of 'inactive' physicians in the United States of America: enticements to reentry

“…Less than a quarter of currently inactive physicians had firm plans to reenter. Over two thirds of retired physicians and 80% of inactive physicians kept at least one medical license, although this may be relatively easy to achieve as there are few states that require measures of clinical activity to maintain licensure [9]. …”

“…A state-level study by Rimsza in Arizona and a survey of physicians over age 50 by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and several specialty societies have provided some important data [5-7]. In addition, Freed et al conducted studies on clinical inactivity among pediatricians and state medical board licensure policies for active and inactive physicians, reporting that 5% of pediatricians were currently inactive, and 12% had at some point experienced a period of clinical inactivity of 12 months or more [8,9]. Because of numerous data gaps identified by the AAP Reentry Project, a survey was fielded in early 2008 on physician reentry into the workforce.…”

Directing Discipline: State Medical Board Responsiveness to State Legislatures

“…Previous literature has examined determinants of SMB behavior in two main arenas: medical licensing, which includes initial licensure and maintenance thereof, and disciplinary activity. Work on licensure tends to focus on boards' willingness or ability to grant initial licenses or issue renewals to certain groups, such as those who wish to practice medicine in multiple states (Hiemenz, Leung, and Park 2014), international medical graduates (Peterson, Pandya, and Leblang 2014), inactive physicians (Freed, Dunham, and Abraham 2009;Kenagy et al 2011), and persons with 9. The SMBs gained the legal authority to discipline based on technical incompetence by 1965 (Grad and Marti 1979).…”

Ensuring high-quality patient care: the role of accreditation, licensure, specialty certification and revalidation in medicine

“…Just as licensure and certification processes vary around the world, the criteria upon which licensure and certification decisions are granted can be quite different . Moreover, to keep up with advances in medicine and changing patient needs, licensure and certification criteria can, and should, be modified over time .…”

“…The ‘revalidation’ process is meant to assure patients, employers and other health care professionals that licensed doctors are up‐to‐date and fit to practise . Recently, there have been discussions of the regulatory challenges associated with doctor re‐entry into clinical practice . Here, the impetus is to ensure that doctors who have left the profession, either voluntarily or because of disciplinary action, are fit to return.…”