Download: PDF Version
Comments on the NEJM article by CEO of ABIM that are overwhelmingly anti-MOC
C-2 – Recognize Alternatives to the ABMS MOC and Recertification Process (ADOPTED
RESOLVED, that the WSMA will support alternative pathways for board recertification
(i.e. NBPAS) and maintenance of certification; and BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED, that the WSMA will propose this resolution to the AMA for consideration
at its next meeting. (Directive to Take Action)
To view link with all official actions from the 2015 annual meeting, click here:
The National Board of Physicians and Surgeons (NBPAS.org) continues to grow with well over 3,100 applicants. At this phase of the project it is essential for hospitals to start accepting NBPAS certification as a valid alternative to ABMS certification. This process usually starts with the hospital’s Medical Executive Committee (MEC) and/or Credentials Committee. Ultimately it requires a change to the hospital bylaws. These committees generally meet once per month so it takes at least several months before the bylaws are changed. We need your help. Please contact your Chief of Staff and request your hospital’s bylaws be changed to accept NBPAS. A sample letter you can personalize and email your Chief of Staff can be found here. It might be helpful to have dozens of your colleagues sign the letter, ie turn it into a petition.
If you are aware of hospitals accepting NBPAS certification not on the list below, please let us know at info@NBPAS.org
Helpful tips to hospital committee approval of NBPAS as an alternative:
1) Many hospital MECs approve of the concept but do not want to be the first. Please let your MEC know they will not be the first, and the list below is growing.
2) Make sure the various hospital committees understand that a requirement of NBPAS certification is previous certification by an ABMS member board. Accepting NBPAS only changes your hospital’s requirements for continuous certification, not initial certification.
3) Success requires several strong physician advocates. Start a petition in your hospital. Get your colleagues involved.
As of 12-31-2015 there are: 3,100 NBPAS diplomates
Hospitals accepting NBPAS as alternative certification for hospital privileges*
1) Capital Region Medical Center – Jefferson City, MO (affiliated w/ Univ. of Missouri)
2) Brandon Regional Hospital – Tampa, FL
3) Shawnee Mission Medical Center – Kansas City, MO
4) Mendocino Coast District Hospital – Fort Bragg, CA
5) Florida Hospital Heartland Division – Sebring, FL
6) Baylor St. Luke’s Medical Center/Texas Heart Institute – Houston, TX
7) Sibley Memorial Hospital, Sibley Memorial, Johns Hopkins Medical System, Washington, DC.
8) Southeast Missouri Hospital, Cape Girardeau, MO
9) Columbia Basin Hospital, Ephrata, WA
10) St. Mary Medical Center, Langhorne, PA
11) St Luke’s Hospital, Cedar Rapids, IA
12) Mercy Medical Center, Cedar Rapids, IA
13) Hoag Hospital, Newport CA in process – MEC approval
14) Texas Health Presbyterian Rockwall, TX
15) Arkansas Heart Hospital, Little Rock, AR
16) Lawrence & Memorial Hospital, New London, CT
17) Providence Little Company of Mary, Torrance, CA
18) Holmes Regional Medical Center, Melbourne, FL
19) Palm Bay Hospital, Palm Bay Florida
20) Wuesthoff Hospital, Melbourne. Florida
21) Virginia Gay Hospital, Vinton, IA
22) Frederick Memorial Hospital, Frederick, MA
23) Oklahoma Heart Hospital, Oklahoma City, OK
24) University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) Hamot, Erie, PA
*Note: Some of the above hospitals have changed their bylaws to allow alternatives to ABMS certification that include NBPAS without specifically naming NBPAS
Last week the ABIM made another change in the MOC requirements and I have been asked by many to comment. Diplomats certified in nine subspecialties of internal medicine will no longer need to maintain underlying certifications to stay certified in those areas. This is a welcome change for many diplomats who believe the old requirement, requiring multiple board certifications. was onerous. Many of our societies lobbied for this change. I believe this change is helpful because it provides physicians with alternatives. However, I should point out that there may be unexpected consequences. Diplomats choosing this route will have to give up their board certification in the underlying specialty. This may be a problematic for many who in addition to their subspecialty, also continue to practice their underlying specialty. For example, many interventional cardiologists also provide care in general cardiology. If these subspecialists choose to limit MOC to interventional cardiology, they will lose their certification in general cardiology which may be problematic.