ABR MOC Survey

[RadOncMegatron]

I am asking people to be brutally honest when taking this survey and give your real ie negative opinions on the nonsense known as MOC with CME and 10 year testing requirements.

Please quote http://www.redjournal.org/article/S0360-3016(15)00374-0/abstract . This wonderful article by Dr. Sandhu titled "Maintenance of Certification: From Realism to Skepticism" captures my sentiments exactly.

We are too scared as a field (this time meaning all medicine not just rad onc) to just skip this all together, but at least have your voice heard on the survey where there are no real consequences (Gulp - I hope!).

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Gfunk6]

Agree 100%. I already made my disgust known via the survey. We need to eliminate the 10 year recert exam at a minimum like anesthesiology has done.

 

[RadOncMegatron]

Agree 100%. I already made my disgust known via the survey. We need to eliminate the 10 year recert exam at a minimum like anesthesiology has done.

Good going Gfunk. I also want to say I let my disgust be known too and did not hold back.

 

[seper]

just curious, what do guys have against recert exam q10 years?

 

[RadOncMegatron]

I would refer you to the article by Dr. Sandhu and also and editorial on the worthless Step 2 CS in NEJM http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1213760?af=R&rss=currentIssue .

The problem with the recert is that it does absolutely nothing. It addresses a fake need ie that we rad oncs would be so behind the times without it. A test that is easy with a 95% pass (as alluded in the NEJM article) does nothing. Also, if you do only head and neck, what is the point of being tested in peds. It also does not improve the quality of anything...

These tests take time out of your practice and costs real money to address a non-need ie doctors needing to be tested to appease the public. Besides, we have to do CMEs to keep up, if so why take a test to prove that we have kept up? If we can take a test to show we have kept up, why do CMEs? Its crazy.

The $$$MONEY$$$ behind all this is extremely unsettling as well.

Not to mention that I do keep up with all the JCO, IJROBP, and NEJM and what do we get for that - NOTHING. This has turned into $20 article and $100 SAMs to "prove" you did CME.

It is also disheartening that after proving yourself in med school, residency, +/- fellowship will continually need to prove yourself... that is unless you were grandfathered in...

 

[medgator]

I would refer you to the article by Dr. Sandhu and also and editorial on the worthless Step 2 CS in NEJM http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1213760?af=R&rss=currentIssue .

The problem with the recert is that it does absolutely nothing. It addresses a fake need ie that we rad oncs would be so behind the times without it. A test that is easy with a 95% pass (as alluded in the NEJM article) does nothing. Also, if you do only head and neck, what is the point of being tested in peds. It also does not improve the quality of anything...

These tests take time out of your practice and costs real money to address a non-need ie doctors needing to be tested to appease the public. Besides, we have to do CMEs to keep up, if so why take a test to prove that we have kept up? If we can take a test to show we have kept up, why do CMEs? Its crazy.

The $$$MONEY$$$ behind all this is extremely unsettling as well.

Not to mention that I do keep up with all the JCO, IJROBP, and NEJM and what do we get for that - NOTHING. This has turned into $20 article and $100 SAMs to "prove" you did CME.

It is also disheartening that after proving yourself in med school, residency, +/- fellowship will continually need to prove yourself... that is unless you were grandfathered in...

The counterpoint to that (not saying I defend the current state of MOC by a long shot because I don't) is that there are lot of dinosaurs in this field in their late 50s and beyond (personal experience, and many can relate to this) who have no idea about current data/trials/3D&IMRT planning/dose painting/SRS&SBRT etc. They still practice, grandfathered in.

 

[RadOncMegatron]

The counterpoint to that (not saying I defend the current state of MOC by a long shot because I don't) is that there are lot of dinosaurs in this field in their late 50s and beyond (personal experience, and many can relate to this) who have no idea about current data/trials/3D&IMRT planning/dose painting/SRS&SBRT etc. They still practice, grandfathered in.

I agree Medgator and do not want to be too controversial (sounds hypocritical - I know I know), but why did they even grandfather people in? If what you say is true ( I am not saying it is or is not true) and those practioners are being protected/grandfathered in doesn't that make this all an even bigger scam? You are deliberately not testing the group that needs it the most or giving the benefit of the doubt if you reach a certain experience level you should be automatically grandfathered in perhaps after 1 MOC test... See this makes the whole process stink of corruption...

 

[BobbyHeenan]

I would welcome a random 10-chart review or something every 10 years rather than all of these CME, MOC tests, and SA-CME's.

With all of the technology today you could electronically submit the DICOM images, plans, clinic notes, etc of a selected number of patients for independent ABR review every 10 years. That would give you information on contouring, treatment planning, dosing, etc that may not be covered in your standard MOC Q10 year exam.

I'm not sure what the answer is, but the system is so flawed right now. It is absolutely about money (anyone that says this isn't a component is being disingenuous - it may not be ALL about the $, but it's definitely a motivating factor) and an entire CME industry for questionable improvement in outcomes is funded on the backs of physicians.