Medical EducationOriginal Article

Comparison of State Medical Licensing Board Disclosures Regarding Resident Performance for United States Allopathic, Osteopathic, and Foreign Medical Graduates

Michal Gajewski, DO; Machteld Hillen, MD; Daniel Matassa, MD; Anastasia Kunac, MD; Michael Anana, MD; Lisa Pompeo, MD; Neil Kothari, MD; and Tiffany Murano, MD
Notes and Affiliations
Notes and Affiliations

Received: May 12, 2020

Accepted: June 16, 2020

Published: November 2, 2020

J Am Osteopath Assoc; 120(12): 871-876

Context: While recent streamlining of the graduate medical education process signals an important change from the traditional dichotomy between doctors of osteopathic medicine (DOs) and US-trained doctors of medicine (USMDs), this new uniformity does not continue into the process for licensure, including state medical licensing verification of training (VOT) forms for DOs, MDs, and foreign medical graduates (FMGs). Wide variability remains.

Objectives: To document the differences in the performance metrics program that directors are required to disclose to state medical licensing boards for DOs and FMGs compared with USMDs.

Methods: VOT forms were collected from all osteopathic and allopathic licensing boards for all US states, Washington DC, and US territories. The authors then reviewed VOT forms for questions pertaining to trainee performance only in states where VOT forms differed for DOs, USMDs, and FMGs. Licensing board questions were categorized as relating to disciplinary action, documents placed on file, resident actions, and nondisciplinary actions by the program.

Results: Fifty-six states and territories were included in the study (50 US states; Washington, DC; and 5 US territories). Most states and territories (46; 82.1%) used the same VOT form for DOs and USMDs. All states and territories except New York used the same form for FMGs and USMDs (55; 98.2%). Of the 14 states with an osteopathic board, Nevada used Federation Credentials Verification Service (FCVS) for DOs only, and 8 states used a unique osteopathic VOT form. Of these 8 osteopathic boards, 3 VOT forms did not ask any questions regarding resident performance during training. Of the remaining 5 forms, all asked about disciplinary actions. Ten states and 1 territory (US Virgin Islands) required the FCVS for both USMDs and FMGs, but not for DOs, while New York required FCVS only for FMGs. Nevada required FCVS only for DOs.

Conclusions: Although VOT requirements for FMGs and USMDs were mostly the same within states, performance metric question sets varied greatly from state to state and within states for osteopathic vs allopathic licensing boards. Implementation of a standardized VOT form for all applicants that includes academic performance metrics may help ensure that medical licensure is granted to all physicians who demonstrate academic competency during training, regardless of their degree.

Read Full Article