Montana Rated Among Worst In Nation For Failing to Keep Patients Informed About Bad Doctors
Consumers Reports News Release
For Immediate Release: Tuesday, March 29, 2016
Contact: Michael McCauley, firstname.lastname@example.org, 415-431-6747, ext 7606 (office) or 415-902-537 (cell)
Consumer Reports: Montana Rated Among Worst In Nation
For Failing to Keep Patients Informed About Bad Doctors
State Medical Boards Urged to Improve Public Access to Disciplinary
Records And Require Physicians on Probation to Tell Patients
YONKERS, NY — A Consumer Reports review of medical board websites in all 50 states and the District of Columbia found that Montana earned one of the lowest ratings in the country for failing to provide easy access to the disciplinary records of doctors licensed to practice in the state. As a result, Montana residents face a challenging time finding out whether their doctor has been put on probation for misconduct, made malpractice payouts, or been convicted of crimes.
“Patients have a right to know whether their doctor has been disciplined for bad behavior, especially when it could endanger their health,” said Lisa McGiffert, Director of Consumer Reports’ Safe Patient Project. “But Montana makes it very hard to find out if a doctor practicing in the state has a history of harming patients or putting them at risk.”
The review of medical board websites is featured in “What You Don’t Know About Your Doctor Could Hurt You,” the cover story of the latest issue of Consumer Reports. The article highlights some of the challenges patients face when checking up on doctors and includes tips for helping consumers find a good physician and what to do if they have been harmed during treatment.
Medical boards are state government agencies responsible for licensing and disciplining doctors and investigating complaints about them. While most doctors have clean records, thousands of doctors around the country have been put on probation by state medical boards for a variety of offenses, including sexual misconduct, drug and alcohol abuse, overprescribing controlled substances, and other unprofessional or dangerous practices. Most of these doctors are allowed to continue seeing patients.
In addition, doctors can be disciplined by the hospitals where they work for misconduct or by federal regulatory and law enforcement agencies for such offenses as Medicare fraud, abusing prescription drugs, or drug related crimes. Doctors who harm patients also can be the subject of malpractice suits.
Consumer Reports and the Informed Patient Institute, a nonprofit group that provides consumers with information about healthcare quality and cost, analyzed medical board websites to see whether they provided easy access to complete information about doctors, rating them on a scale of 1 to 100. The Montana Board of Medical Examiners’ website received a score of 26, among the lowest in the country.
- Montana’s medical board doesn’t use simple language on its website homepage directing users how to search for a doctor’s profile. The homepage features a “Licensee Search” link to launch a search, which may not be as obvious to users as more consumer friendly language like “Find a Doctor” or “Doctor Profile.” The site only allows searches by name and license number (which is not known by most users) and does not disclose whether a doctor is licensed in other states or identify which information in their profile was verified by the board.
- Montana received good marks for providing a plain language description of its complaint process and a “Frequently Asked Questions” page to help users understand the board’s role and procedures. But it doesn’t allow users to submit complaints about doctors online or spell out how soon complaints must be submitted to the board after a patient encounters misconduct.
- Montana received fair marks for the information it provides about the disciplinary actions taken by the medical board against doctors licensed in the state. The website provides a link to the board’s disciplinary orders for each physician going back ten years or more, which is important information to make readily available to the public. But it doesn’t provide a plain language summary of board actions, including the date, duration, and license restrictions for each one on the physician profile.
- Finally, the Montana medical board received poor marks for not posting a doctor profile on its website that provides a full picture of each licensed doctor’s history, including information about disciplinary actions against the doctor taken by hospitals and the federal government, malpractice payouts, and whether the doctor has been convicted of any crimes.
To help ensure patients can find out whether their doctor has a history of misconduct more easily, Consumers Union urged all state medical boards to adopt a number of reforms to help make their websites more consumer-friendly, including:
- Use easily understandable search terms on medical board home pages and eye catching graphics to help consumers quickly find doctor-specific information.
- Include a plain language summary of any disciplinary actions taken by the medical board on a physician’s profile that includes the date, reason, duration, and restrictions tied to the order, as well as links to documents with more detailed information.
- In addition to board disciplinary orders, provide more comprehensive information on all physicians, including information about malpractice lawsuits, disciplinary actions taken by hospitals and federal agencies, and criminal convictions.
- Allow the public to file complaints online and provide clear information about how complaints are handled, including expected time frames and when and how the complainant will be notified of the outcome.
While these kinds of website improvements will make it easier for consumers to check up on their doctors, Consumers Union has urged medical boards to require doctors on probation to inform their patients. “The onus shouldn’t be on patients to investigate their physicians,” said McGiffert. “Doctors on probation should be required to tell their patients of their status.” A Consumer Reports survey found that 82 percent of consumers are in favor of requiring doctors to tell their patients if they are on probation and why.
At the national level, Consumer Reports has advocated for the National Practitioners Data Bank, a federal repository that includes information about disciplinary actions taken by state medical boards, hospitals, as well as malpractice payments, to be open to the public. Only hospitals, doctors, law enforcement, insurance companies, and a few other select groups are currently granted access. Medical Boards should also have free access to the Data Bank when checking on licensed doctors.
© 2016 Consumer Reports. The material above is intended for legitimate news entities only; it may not be used for advertising or promotional purposes. Consumer Reports® is an expert, independent nonprofit organization whose mission is to work for a fair, just, and safe marketplace for all consumers and to empower consumers to protect themselves. We accept no advertising and pay for all the products we test. We are not beholden to any commercial interest. Our income is derived from the sale of Consumer Reports®, ConsumerReports.org® and our other publications and information products, services, fees, and noncommercial contributions and grants. Our Ratings and reports are intended solely for the use of our readers. Neither the Ratings nor the reports may be used in advertising or for any other commercial purpose without our permission. Consumer Reports will take all steps open to it to prevent commercial use of its materials, its name, or the name of Consumer Reports®.