Outcomes of the American Board of Dermatology focused Practice Improvement program 2016-2023.

continuing certification general dermatology practice improvement

Journal

Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
ISSN: 1097-6787
Titre abrégé: J Am Acad Dermatol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7907132

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
22 Oct 2024
Historique:
received: 14 05 2024
revised: 19 08 2024
accepted: 26 09 2024
medline: 25 10 2024
pubmed: 25 10 2024
entrez: 24 10 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Board-certified dermatologists experience diverse practice gaps. Identify the top self-selected focused Practice Improvement (fPI) modules completed over time by board-certified dermatologists during the program's first 8 years. Cohort study of dermatologists certified by American Board of Dermatology (ABD) completing fPI modules from 2016 to 2023. This descriptive analysis reports modules completed by topic, subspecialty, relevance, and self-reported changes to subsequent patient care related to modules. 19143 fPI modules were completed by 7378 unique ABD diplomates, representing 48.8% of all current ABD-certified dermatologists (n = 15118). Modules were rated relevant by 18917 participants (99%). Care gaps requiring improvement efforts and performance remeasurement occurred in 2919 (15.2%) completed modules. Acne and medication-related laboratory monitoring were popular topics requiring improvement. Diplomates reported care improvements resulting from completing modules in 8397 instances (43.9%), and improved patient outcomes in at least one patient 5310 times (27.7%). Finally, diplomates stated they would recommend fPI modules to peers 18633 (97.3%) times. Dermatologists who started but did not complete modules would not have rated the module. Attribution bias on care impact is possible and potentially overestimated. The ABD fPI program is helping board-certified dermatologists identify and improve gaps in care with reported patient outcome improvements.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Board-certified dermatologists experience diverse practice gaps.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
Identify the top self-selected focused Practice Improvement (fPI) modules completed over time by board-certified dermatologists during the program's first 8 years.
METHODS METHODS
Cohort study of dermatologists certified by American Board of Dermatology (ABD) completing fPI modules from 2016 to 2023. This descriptive analysis reports modules completed by topic, subspecialty, relevance, and self-reported changes to subsequent patient care related to modules.
RESULTS RESULTS
19143 fPI modules were completed by 7378 unique ABD diplomates, representing 48.8% of all current ABD-certified dermatologists (n = 15118). Modules were rated relevant by 18917 participants (99%). Care gaps requiring improvement efforts and performance remeasurement occurred in 2919 (15.2%) completed modules. Acne and medication-related laboratory monitoring were popular topics requiring improvement. Diplomates reported care improvements resulting from completing modules in 8397 instances (43.9%), and improved patient outcomes in at least one patient 5310 times (27.7%). Finally, diplomates stated they would recommend fPI modules to peers 18633 (97.3%) times.
LIMITATIONS CONCLUSIONS
Dermatologists who started but did not complete modules would not have rated the module. Attribution bias on care impact is possible and potentially overestimated.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
The ABD fPI program is helping board-certified dermatologists identify and improve gaps in care with reported patient outcome improvements.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39447760
pii: S0190-9622(24)03039-1
doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2024.09.071
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Auteurs

Erik Stratman (E)

Associate Executive Director, American Board of Dermatology, Newton, Massachusetts; Department of Dermatology, Marshfield Clinic Health System, Marshfield, Wisconsin.

Stanley Miller (S)

Associate Executive Director, American Board of Dermatology, Newton, Massachusetts; Department of Dermatology, University of Maryland Medical System, Towson, Maryland.

Murad Alam (M)

Departments of Dermatology, Otolaryngology, Surgery, and Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois.

Sacharitha Bowers (S)

Division of Dermatology, Loyola University Medical Center, Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, Illinois.

Erin F Mathes (EF)

Department of Dermatology, University of California, San Francisco, California.

Kiran Motaparthi (K)

University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville Florida.

Andrea Murina (A)

Department of Dermatology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans Louisiana.

Rachelle Naridze (R)

Medical Service-Dermatology Section, Central Texas Veterans Health Care System, Temple, Texas.

Gideon P Smith (GP)

Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.

Deirdre A Stolmeier (DA)

Dermatology Department, Nebraska Methodist Health System, Omaha, Nebraska.

Adam Sutton (A)

Department of Dermatology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska.

Melissa Williams (M)

Parkview Physicians Group Dermatology, Bryan, Ohio.

Randy Roenigk (R)

Associate Executive Director, American Board of Dermatology, Newton, Massachusetts; Department of Dermatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.

Classifications MeSH