Physician Scores on a National Clinical Skills Examination as Predictors of Complaints to Medical Regulatory Authorities | Shared Decision Making and Communication | JAMA | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 35.175.212.130. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Levinson W, Roger D, Mullooly J, Dull V, Frankel R. Physician-patient communication: the relationship with malpractice claims among primary care physicians and surgeons.  JAMA. 1997;277(7):553-5599032162Google ScholarCrossref
2.
Franks P, Fiscella K, Shields CG.  et al.  Are patients' ratings of their physicians related to health outcomes?  Ann Fam Med. 2005;3(3):229-23415928226Google ScholarCrossref
3.
Hickson GB, Clayton EW, Githens PB, Sloan FA. Factors that prompted families to file medical malpractice claims following perinatal injuries.  JAMA. 1992;267(10):1359-13631740858Google ScholarCrossref
4.
Beckman HB, Markakis KM, Suchman AL, Frankel RM. The doctor-patient relationship and malpractice: lessons from plaintiff depositions.  Arch Intern Med. 1994;154(12):1365-13708002688Google ScholarCrossref
5.
Kohatsu ND, Gould D, Ross LK, Fox PJ. Characteristics associated with physician discipline: a case-control study.  Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(6):653-65815037494Google ScholarCrossref
6.
Stelfox HT, Gandhi TK, Orav EJ, Gustafson ML. The relation of patient satisfaction with complaints against physicians and malpractice lawsuits.  Am J Med. 2005;118(10):1126-113316194644Google ScholarCrossref
7.
Baldwin LM, Larson EH, Hart LG, Greer T, Lloyd M, Rosenblatt RA. Characteristics of physicians with obstetric malpractice claims experience.  Obstet Gynecol. 1991;78(6):1050-10541945206Google Scholar
8.
Bovbjerg RR, Petronis KR. The relationship between physicians' malpractice claims history and later claims: does the past predict the future?  JAMA. 1994;272(18):1421-14267933423Google ScholarCrossref
9.
Sloan FA, Mergenhagen PM, Burfield WB, Bovbjerg RR, Hassan M. Medical malpractice experience of physicians: predictable or haphazard?  JAMA. 1989;262(23):3291-32972585673Google ScholarCrossref
10.
Hickson GB, Federspiel CF, Pichert JW, Miller CS, Gauld-Jaeger J, Bost P. Patient complaints and malpractice risk.  JAMA. 2002;287(22):2951-295712052124Google ScholarCrossref
11.
Hickson GB, Pichert JW, Federspiel CF, Clayton EW. Development of an Early Identification and Response Model of Malpractice Prevention. Law and Contemporary Problems. 1997;60(1):7-29. Medical Malpractice: External Influences and Controls, part 1
12.
Vincent C, Young M, Phillips A. Why do people sue doctors? a study of patients and relatives taking legal action.  Lancet. 1994;343(8913):1609-16137911925Google ScholarCrossref
13.
Hickson GB, Clayton EW, Entman SS.  et al.  Obstetricians' prior malpractice experience and patients' satisfaction with care.  JAMA. 1994;272(20):1583-15877966867Google ScholarCrossref
14.
Moore PJ, Adler NE, Robertson PA. Medical malpractice: the effect of doctor-patient relations on medical patient perceptions and malpractice intentions.  West J Med. 2000;173(4):244-25011017984Google ScholarCrossref
15.
Papadakis MA, Teherani A, Banach MA.  et al.  Disciplinary action by medical boards and prior behavior in medical school.  N Engl J Med. 2005;353(25):2673-268216371633Google ScholarCrossref
16.
Fiscella K, Meldrum S, Franks P.  et al.  Patient trust: is it related to patient-centered behavior of primary care physicians?  Med Care. 2004;42(11):1049-105515586831Google ScholarCrossref
17.
Stillman P, Swanson D, Regan MB.  et al.  Assessment of clinical skills of residents utilizing standardized patients.  Ann Intern Med. 1991;114(5):393-4011992883Google ScholarCrossref
18.
AAMC.  Report III: Contemporary Issues in Medicine: Communication in Medicine. http://www.aamc.org/meded/msop/. Washington, DC: Association of American Medical Colleges; 2006:1-29. Medical School Objectives Project. Accessed August 10, 2007
19.
Reznick RK, Blackmore D, Dauphinee WD, Rothman AI, Smee S. Large-scale high-stakes testing with an OSCE: report from the Medical Council of Canada.  Acad Med. 1996;71(1):(suppl)  S19-S218546771Google ScholarCrossref
20.
Whelan G. Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates: lessons learned in a high-stakes, high-volume medical performance examination.  Med Teach. 2000;22(3):293-296Google ScholarCrossref
21.
Papadakis MA. The Step 2 clinical-skills examination.  N Engl J Med. 2004;350(17):1703-170515102993Google ScholarCrossref
22.
USMLE.  Harris Interactive Poll, Results from: United States Medical Licensing Examination. http://www.usmle.org/news/Step2CSNews/Harris.asp. Accessed August 10, 2007
23.
Hoppe RB. Performance Assessment: Why Should Medical Schools Care? Henry R, Mavis B, Mullan P, Pryor O, Solomon D, eds. East Lansing: Office of Medical Education Research and Development, Michigan State University; 2002
24.
Bogdonoff MD. The clinical-skills examination.  N Engl J Med. 2004;351(5):507-50915287108Google ScholarCrossref
25.
Musco S. The clinical-skills examination.  N Engl J Med. 2004;351(5):507-50915287107Google ScholarCrossref
26.
Henry SG. Playing doctor.  JAMA. 2005;294(17):2138-214016264147Google ScholarCrossref
27.
Hallock JA, Melnick DE, Thompson JN. The step 2 clinical skills examination.  JAMA. 2006;295(10):1123-112416522829Google Scholar
28.
Federation of State Medical Boards.  Elements of a modern state medical board. http://www.fsmb.org/pdf/GRPOL_Elements_Modern_Medical_Board.pdf. 2006. Accessed August 10, 2007
29.
Federation of State Medical Boards.  A guide to the essentials of a modern medical practice act–tenth edition. http://www.fsmb.org/pdf/2003_grpol_modern_medical_practice_act.pdf. 2003. Accessed August 10, 2007
30.
Dauphinee WD. Self regulation must be made to work.  BMJ. 2005;330(7504):1385-138715947404Google ScholarCrossref
31.
Federation of Medical Regulatory Authorities of Canada.. http://www.fmrac.ca. 2007. Accessibility verified July 16, 2007
32.
Federation of State Medical Boards. http://www.fsmb.org. 2007. Accessibility verified July 16, 2007
33.
Mandin H, Dauphinee WD. Conceptual guidelines for developing and maintaining curriculum and examination objectives: the experience of the Medical Council of Canada.  Acad Med. 2000;75(10):1031-103711031155Google ScholarCrossref
34.
Page G, Bordage G, Allen T. Developing key-feature problems and examinations to assess clinical decision-making skills.  Acad Med. 1995;70(3):194-2017873006Google ScholarCrossref
35.
Scherpbier AJJA, van der Vleuten C, Rethans J-J, van der Steeg AFWOptimizing the Input of Physician Examiners in Setting Standards for a Large Scale OSCE: Experience With Part II of the Qualifying Examination of the Medical Council of Canada. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1997
36.
Osborne JW. Effect sizes and disattentuation of correlation and regression coefficients: lessons. http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=11 8[11]. 2003. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation. Accessed August 10, 2007
37.
Hastie TJ, Tibshirani RJ. Generalized Additive Models. London, England: Chapman & Hall; 1990
38.
Hanley JA. A heuristic approach to the formulas for population attributable fraction.  J Epidemiol Community Health. 2001;55(7):508-51411413183Google ScholarCrossref
39.
Signorini D. Sample size for Poisson regression.  Biometrika. 1991;78(2):446-450Google ScholarCrossref
40.
Edelstein RA, Reid HM, Usatine R, Wilkes MS. A comparative study of measures to evaluate medical students' performance.  Acad Med. 2000;75(8):825-83310965862Google ScholarCrossref
41.
Roberts RG, Friedsam D, Beasley JW, Helstad C, Moberg DP. The state of quality reports: comparing states by their rankings.  WMJ. 2006;105(8):60-6617256714Google Scholar
42.
Federation of State Medical Boards.  State medical board disciplinary reports: 2005; trends in physician regulations–2006. http://www.fsmb.org/pdf/PUB_FSMB_Trends_in_Physician_Regulation_2006.pdf. April 2006. Accessibility verified July 16, 2007
43.
Halperin EC. Grievances against physicians: 11 years' experience of a medical society grievance committee.  West J Med. 2000;173(4):235-23811017980Google ScholarCrossref
44.
Lumsden MA, Bore M, Millar K, Jack R, Powis D. Assessment of personal qualities in relation to admission to medical school.  Med Educ. 2005;39(3):258-26515733161Google ScholarCrossref
45.
Yedidia MJ, Gillespie CC, Kachur E.  et al.  Effect of communications training on medical student performance.  JAMA. 2003;290(9):1157-116512952997Google ScholarCrossref
46.
Ben-David MF, Klass DJ, Boulet J.  et al.  The performance of foreign medical graduates on the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) standardized patient examination prototype: a collaborative study of the NBME and the Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG).  Med Educ. 1999;33(6):439-44610354321Google ScholarCrossref
47.
Page G, Bordage G. The Medical Council of Canada's key features project: a more valid written examination of clinical decision-making skills.  Acad Med. 1995;70(2):104-1107865034Google ScholarCrossref
48.
Cleary TA, Linn RL, Walster GW. Effect of reliability and validity on power of statistical tests. Sociol Methodol. 1970;2:130-138
Original Contribution
Clinician's Corner
September 5, 2007

Physician Scores on a National Clinical Skills Examination as Predictors of Complaints to Medical Regulatory Authorities

Author Affiliations
 

Author Affiliations: Departments of Medicine (Drs Tamblyn and Dauphinee) and Epidemiology & Biostatistics (Drs Abrahamowicz, Winslade, Buckeridge, and Hanley, and Mss Girard and Du Berger), McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Drs Wenghofer and Klass); Quebec College of Physicians, Montreal (Dr Jacques); and Medical Council of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario (Dr Blackmore and Mss Smee and Bartman).

JAMA. 2007;298(9):993-1001. doi:10.1001/jama.298.9.993
Abstract

Context Poor patient-physician communication increases the risk of patient complaints and malpractice claims. To address this problem, licensure assessment has been reformed in Canada and the United States, including a national standardized assessment of patient-physician communication and clinical history taking and examination skills.

Objective To assess whether patient-physician communication examination scores in the clinical skills examination predicted future complaints in medical practice.

Design, Setting, and Participants Cohort study of all 3424 physicians taking the Medical Council of Canada clinical skills examination between 1993 and 1996 who were licensed to practice in Ontario and/or Quebec. Participants were followed up until 2005, including the first 2 to 12 years of practice.

Main Outcome Measure Patient complaints against study physicians that were filed with medical regulatory authorities in Ontario or Quebec and retained after investigation. Multivariate Poisson regression was used to estimate the relationship between complaint rate and scores on the clinical skills examination and traditional written examination. Scores are based on a standardized mean (SD) of 500 (100).

Results Overall, 1116 complaints were filed for 3424 physicians, and 696 complaints were retained after investigation. Of the physicians, 17.1% had at least 1 retained complaint, of which 81.9% were for communication or quality-of-care problems. Patient-physician communication scores for study physicians ranged from 31 to 723 (mean [SD], 510.9 [91.1]). A 2-SD decrease in communication score was associated with 1.17 more retained complaints per 100 physicians per year (relative risk [RR], 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-1.61) and 1.20 more communication complaints per 100 practice-years (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.15-1.77). After adjusting for the predictive ability of the clinical decision-making score in the traditional written examination, the patient-physician communication score in the clinical skills examination remained significantly predictive of retained complaints (likelihood ratio test, P < .001), with scores in the bottom quartile explaining an additional 9.2% (95% CI, 4.7%-13.1%) of complaints.

Conclusion Scores achieved in patient-physician communication and clinical decision making on a national licensing examination predicted complaints to medical regulatory authorities.

×