From the Editor
When a doctor cannot do good, he must be kept from doing harm.
—Hippocrates
Over time, the model of health care delivery continues to evolve, impacted by overall practice efficiency, quality of care, and economic challenges. With the evolving changes in health care delivery, it is important that patient safety and quality of care outcomes are monitored. There has been an overall increase in patient complaints against healthcare providers, which produces challenges in providing effective medical regulation. Maintaining accountability, transparency, and effective oversight in the medical regulation process is critical in preserving patient safety and public trust. While managing and processing patient complaints is critically important, this often produces significant stress for all those involved in medical regulation protocols. Improving the overall complaint process and communication by medical regulators may help decrease stress and improve satisfaction for all involved.
Over the last 30 years, there has been a significant growth in group medical practice on a global scale. The growth is most significant in Western countries with the belief that this transition would enhance physician performance and patient outcomes. Despite the significant growth of group medical practice, the full impact on patient care remains unclear. It is important to develop evaluation methods to assess the performance of group medical practice on patient care and physician well-being. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta (CPSA) developed a pilot project, the Group Practice Review (GPR) to assess family medicine and general practice clinical performance. In the article "Revolutionizing Clinical Evaluation: Developing and Piloting a Group Practice Review Method for Family Medicine Clinics," (page 6) Ashworth and co-authors demonstrated a GPR pilot for evaluating family medicine and general practice clinics. The pilot project was cost-effective and promoted proactive change and corrective actions.
While high-profile healthcare misconduct draws prominent headlines, there is less awareness regarding broader healthcare misconduct across all healthcare professionals. In the research article "Sex, Drugs, and Continuing Education: Analysis of Profession Misconduct by Healthcare Licensees in Michigan (2011-2023)," (page 35) Alvarez and Gibbs examined misconduct across 27 healthcare professions in Michigan between 2011 and 2023. During this period there was a dramatic increase in complaints, but a slight decrease in sanctions. Their study demonstrated inconsistent reporting mechanisms, gaps in accountability, and challenges to effective oversight that undermined patient safety and public trust. Potential reforms to enhance the regulatory process are discussed.
While processing and managing patient complaints against healthcare providers is critically important, the complaint process can be incredibly stressful for all involved and can have negative effects on the mental health of healthcare practitioners. In the research article, "What Makes and Experience Positive in a Regulatory Complaints Management Process? A Qualitative Study," (page 17) Bondu and co-authors identify factors that help make the complaints process positive and worthwhile. Frequent, clear, and empathetic communication was an important determinant of satisfaction across all groups.
For over 40 years, the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) Research and Education Foundation has promoted research and educational initiatives to strengthen patient safety and healthcare quality through effective medical regulation. In the general scholarly article "The FSMB Research and Education Foundation: A Brief History and New Opportunities," (page 48) Rhyne and co-authors reflect on the history of the Foundation and achievements of significant milestones. Since 2009, the Foundation has distributed more than $1 million dollars in funding to support and strengthen the medical regulatory system with new challenges in medical regulation. Future initiatives and strategies of the Foundation are previewed.
Mark A. Bechtel, MD
Editor-in-Chief
