Board Certification

[JMU07]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Passed in the AOA House of Delegates today... what are everyone's thoughts on this?

 

[cloud99]

Is it going to be mandatory or elective?
What is the process for board certification? Another exam?
No doubt it will entail additional costs/fees...
Now will insurance companies only pay board certified OD's??

Sorry about all the questions, I'm just clueless about what it all means.

 

[scalded]

Is it going to be mandatory or elective?
What is the process for board certification? Another exam?
No doubt it will entail additional costs/fees...
Now will insurance companies only pay board certified OD's??

Sorry about all the questions, I'm just clueless about what it all means.

1. Elective
2. you have to have a certain number of points. from practice, CE or residency. There is some sort of test I believe.
3. Of course it will involve extra costs. Oh yeah and the AOA and it's spin off organization will be happy to accept your money
4. Possibly.

I'm pissed. I didn't want to do a residency, but now I have to consider doing slave work for an extra year just because of this crap.

 

[thanotoriousfob]

1. Elective
2. you have to have a certain number of points. from practice, CE or residency. There is some sort of test I believe.
3. Of course it will involve extra costs. Oh yeah and the AOA and it's spin off organization will be happy to accept your money
4. Possibly.

I'm pissed. I didn't want to do a residency, but now I have to consider doing slave work for an extra year just because of this crap.

What does residency have to do with board certification?

 

[EyEnStein 07]

What does residency have to do with board certification?

I think i read somewhere before that in order to keep board certification or something there is like a point system as scalded mentioned. Having residency fulfills some of these "points", also i believe things like going to school (continuing education) also contributes, so do research projects etc...

 

[scalded]

What does residency have to do with board certification?

If you do a residency you can take the board exam right away otherwise it takes something like 3 years before you can take it.

 

[Ryan_eyeball]

Passed in the AOA House of Delegates today... what are everyone's thoughts on this?

"Board Certification" = "B.S"

The only reason I that I could remotely see why this passed was because of the new obamacare system that could take effect. If you want to stay in Medicare/Medicaid systems, those governments program could require a "board certification."

So now I have to waste more money, time just to have another "board certified" plaque on my wall. Not to mention that the NBEO board certified paper really means almost nothing.

You go through NBEO part 1, 2, 3, TMOD, state laws tests (some state practicals, interviews, and written tests), then board certification. Oh yeah, that 100-200k priced OD degree means absolutely nothing in any other state you're not licensed.

God forbid we actually lobby for something that might help OD's. For example, license mobility or insurance discrimination to medical plans. B.C. will not get you onto more insurance panels or get you more money from insurance plans.

Will i become board certified? Probably yes. Kansas is very restrictive of who they allow practice in our state. So, I'm sure it will will eventually become a state law.

 

[eyestrain]

It also screws new ODs the hardest as we have to take the most CE to gather up enough point to be eligible, while guys out for 30 years are immediately eligible. Brilliant. I hope your money trees are coming along nicely.

 

[Frank101]

Here is some information I found if anyone is interested in reading.

This link has some common "myths" about the board certification: http://www.aoa.org/documents/JBCPT-20090119.pdf

This link is just the cover story about the decision:http://www.aoa.org/x12978.xml

 

[Meibomian SxN]

Interesting side note: Just found out Michael Jackson's personal doctor was not Board Certified in Cardiology or Internal Medicine; yet he can treat both categories of patients with no problems....

😕

 

[DO2Be2013]

Interesting side note: Just found out Michael Jackson's personal doctor was not Board Certified in Cardiology or Internal Medicine; yet he can treat both categories of patients with no problems....

😕

Any physician with a license can treat any kind of patient, legally speaking. A psychiatrist can legally perform open heart surgery. Board certification has nothing to do with it. But FYI, Conrad Murray was board-certified; he just let it lapse on 12/31/08. He still had a valid license though. He did a legit IM residency and Cardiology fellowship at Meharry. Apparently what might get him into legal trouble was that he didn't register with the DEA in California and potentially may have prescribed/given some controlled drugs there...

 

[Meibomian SxN]

Any physician with a license can treat any kind of patient, legally speaking. A psychiatrist can legally perform open heart surgery. Board certification has nothing to do with it. But FYI, Conrad Murray was board-certified; he just let it lapse on 12/31/08. He still had a valid license though. He did a legit IM residency and Cardiology fellowship at Meharry. Apparently what might get him into legal trouble was that he didn't register with the DEA in California and potentially may have prescribed/given some controlled drugs there...

Just to correct you, medically speaking, a physician can not treat any patient. Legally speaking, lets say for example a general ophthalmologist gives an intravitreal injection and it goes wrong; the lawyer will raise the question of why it was not done by a retina/vitreous surgeon; even though it is not a difficult procedure to do. Its not to say its malpractice, but board certification in a specialty can be against you in that case.

Also, physicians can generally only prescribe within their scope of practice; meaning a psychiatrist or internist can not prescribe spectacle glasses (actually know of one who got suspended for doing so); or ODs can not prescribe cough syrup (actually know from example lol).

Conrad Murray's problem is 1) He was not B.C. in cardiology (which is standard for all medical specialists) 2) Cardiologists typically don't treat chronic pain patients, that the job of pain management doctors...

 

[DO2Be2013]

Just to correct you, medically speaking, a physician can not treat any patient. Legally speaking, lets say for example a general ophthalmologist gives an intravitreal injection and it goes wrong; the lawyer will raise the question of why it was not done by a retina/vitreous surgeon; even though it is not a difficult procedure to do. Its not to say its malpractice, but board certification in a specialty can be against you in that case.

Also, physicians can generally only prescribe within their scope of practice; meaning a psychiatrist or internist can not prescribe spectacle glasses (actually know of one who got suspended for doing so); or ODs can not prescribe cough syrup (actually know from example lol).

Conrad Murray's problem is 1) He was not B.C. in cardiology (which is standard for all medical specialists) 2) Cardiologists typically don't treat chronic pain patients, that the job of pain management doctors...

Just to correct you, I said legally speaking, not "medically" speaking. And, yes, a license to practice medicine allows one to engage in the full scope of medicine and surgery, legally. Practically? Hell no. A psychiatrist would never actually engage in heart surgery for a number of reasons; one would be civil liability (ie, malpractice), not to mention the fact that no insurance would pay for it and no hospital would grant privileges and no anesthesiologist or nurse would knowingly participate... but, it is not illegal. As a physician, you don't get licensed separately to practice cardiology or practice surgery or practice psychiatry... there is only one medical license, to practice medicine and surgery, and in most states you are eligible for it after just one year of post-graduate training.

Also, just to correct you again, board certification has nothing to do with your legal ability to practice medicine and it is certainly not "standard" for all specialists. One major example would be physicians recently graduated from residency/fellowship... most specialty boards require one to three years of active practice or a certain number of patients seen independently before you can become board certified which results in lots of young board-eligible but not board-certified physicians practicing in all settings and specialties. Another example would be the old-school general practitioners (a dying breed now) who completed only an internship before becoming licensed to practice and informally specialize in primary care (which, yes, is a specialty) or other fields.

Board certification has nothing to do with your legal standing to practice medicine. Malpractice litigation like you're talking about is not a criminal issue so it has nothing to do with this. Dispensing controlled substances without a DEA number is, which is why Dr. Murray might be in legal trouble. Of course he could be in civil trouble for practicing outside his scope of training. His lack of BC and practicing pain control might make him a shady guy and definitely vulnerable to a malpractice suit or board sanctions, but there's nothing illegal about either.

As for prescriptive authority... spectacles don't usually fall under the scope of medicine/surgery so I could see a physician potentially getting into legal trouble for this. But there is no legal limitation on prescriptive authority once you are licensed as a physician (unlike dentists or optometrists or others who in various states have restricted prescriptive authority). A licensed physician can prescribe any drug. The only thing is with Schedule II (and depending upon some states Schedule III and IV) drugs... in addition to having a medical license you must also register with the DEA to prescribe these. Of course in reality most doctors generally stay within their scope of practice when prescribing; there are a host of non-legal ramifications when you don't (insurance audits, malpractice liability, staff privileges, etc.). I've never met a family doctor who would, say, order chemo drugs, even though they legally could. Yeah, I think it's a little suspect that Jackson's dermatologist was regularly prescribing Xanax and Percocet, but it's perfectly legal.

 

[Meibomian SxN]

Just to correct you, I said legally speaking, not "medically" speaking. And, yes, a license to practice medicine allows one to engage in the full scope of medicine and surgery, legally. Practically? Hell no. A psychiatrist would never actually engage in heart surgery for a number of reasons; one would be civil liability (ie, malpractice), not to mention the fact that no insurance would pay for it and no hospital would grant privileges and no anesthesiologist or nurse would knowingly participate... but, it is not illegal. As a physician, you don't get licensed separately to practice cardiology or practice surgery or practice psychiatry... there is only one medical license, to practice medicine and surgery, and in most states you are eligible for it after just one year of post-graduate training.

Also, just to correct you again, board certification has nothing to do with your legal ability to practice medicine and it is certainly not "standard" for all specialists. One major example would be physicians recently graduated from residency/fellowship... most specialty boards require one to three years of active practice or a certain number of patients seen independently before you can become board certified which results in lots of young board-eligible but not board-certified physicians practicing in all settings and specialties. Another example would be the old-school general practitioners (a dying breed now) who completed only an internship before becoming licensed to practice and informally specialize in primary care (which, yes, is a specialty) or other fields.

Board certification has nothing to do with your legal standing to practice medicine. Malpractice litigation like you're talking about is not a criminal issue so it has nothing to do with this. Dispensing controlled substances without a DEA number is, which is why Dr. Murray might be in legal trouble. Of course he could be in civil trouble for practicing outside his scope of training. His lack of BC and practicing pain control might make him a shady guy and definitely vulnerable to a malpractice suit or board sanctions, but there's nothing illegal about either.

As for prescriptive authority... spectacles don't usually fall under the scope of medicine/surgery so I could see a physician potentially getting into legal trouble for this. But there is no legal limitation on prescriptive authority once you are licensed as a physician (unlike dentists or optometrists or others who in various states have restricted prescriptive authority). A licensed physician can prescribe any drug. The only thing is with Schedule II (and depending upon some states Schedule III and IV) drugs... in addition to having a medical license you must also register with the DEA to prescribe these. Of course in reality most doctors generally stay within their scope of practice when prescribing; there are a host of non-legal ramifications when you don't (insurance audits, malpractice liability, staff privileges, etc.). I've never met a family doctor who would, say, order chemo drugs, even though they legally could. Yeah, I think it's a little suspect that Jackson's dermatologist was regularly prescribing Xanax and Percocet, but it's perfectly legal.

True, a psychiatrist can perform surgery with the MD degree. Lets rephrase it to say: all medical doctors are allowed to practice surgery; but not all are qualified. And without this qualification, it is called malpractice...

And to correct you, B.C. does have alot to do with the legal standing. Especially in today's "malpractice world." That is what lawyers go after. They can easily use it for or against you. In MJ's case, his cardiologist was not Board Certified so it helps bring down his credentials. By law, yes a general oMD can perform pneumatic retinoplexy or family practice MD can perform Botox injections, but if the patient has "unexpected outcomes" the first thing lawyers check are credentials and scope of practice; and in that case being a retina fellow or within family practice scope of practice helps considerably.

As far as legal limitation on prescriptive authority, you are right in that a MD/DO can prescribe basically anything. But if its not under their scope, the pharmacist will & do give hell over filling it (I know this from example lolol).

Jackson's derm was allowed by law to prescribe Xanax/Percocet; again the problem of malpractice creeps in because that's not typically "scope of practice...."

 

[DO2Be2013]

True, a psychiatrist can perform surgery with the MD degree. Lets rephrase it to say: all medical doctors are allowed to practice surgery; but not all are qualified. And without this qualification, it is called malpractice...

And to correct you, B.C. does have alot to do with the legal standing. Especially in today's "malpractice world." That is what lawyers go after. They can easily use it for or against you. In MJ's case, his cardiologist was not Board Certified so it helps bring down his credentials. By law, yes a general oMD can perform pneumatic retinoplexy or family practice MD can perform Botox injections, but if the patient has "unexpected outcomes" the first thing lawyers check are credentials and scope of practice; and in that case being a retina fellow or within family practice scope of practice helps considerably.

As far as legal limitation on prescriptive authority, you are right in that a MD/DO can prescribe basically anything. But if its not under their scope, the pharmacist will & do give hell over filling it (I know this from example lolol).

Jackson's derm was allowed by law to prescribe Xanax/Percocet; again the problem of malpractice creeps in because that's not typically "scope of practice...."

Sigh. I think your problem is that you're confounding what's "illegal" with what could be considered malpractice. I never said that a medical license qualifies you, in a practical sense, to do anything you want. I simply stated that it gives you the legal ability to do so, which for what feels like the millionth time, is true. End of discussion.

Your bolded statement... false, again. There is nothing illegal about practicing without board certification. Nothing. BC has nothing to do with your legal standing to practice medicine. Medical malpractice is a civil/tort issue, not a criminal one, so all this talk about what may constitute malpractice is irrelevent.

My claim was that MJs cardiologist was being investigated by the police for potentially breaking criminal laws not because he wasn't a board-certified physician (because, again, practicing without BC is not a criminal issue if you have a medical license... regardless of whether it would be a malpractice issue). His alleged criminal action was administering controlled substances without a California DEA registration (which is in fact against the law). Nothing you've said refutes that, so I'm not even sure what you're trying to argue about now.