Murano Tiffany, Gajewski Michal, Anana Michael, Hillen Machteld, Kunac Anastasia, Matassa Daniel, Pompeo Lisa, Kothari Neil
J Grad Med Educ. 2019 Jun;11(3):307-312. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-18-00970.1.
State medical licensing boards ask program directors (PDs) to complete verification of training (VOT) forms for licensure. While residency programs use Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education core competencies, there is no uniform process or set of metrics that licensing boards use to ascertain if academic competency was achieved.
We determined the performance metrics PDs are required to disclose on state licensing VOT forms.
VOT forms for allopathic medical licensing boards for all 50 states, Washington, DC, and 5 US territories were obtained via online search and reviewed. Questions were categorized by disciplinary action (investigated, disciplined, placed on probation, expelled, terminated); documents placed on file; resident actions (leave of absence, request for transfer, unexcused absences); and non-disciplinary actions (remediation, partial or no credit, non-renewal, non-promotion, extra training required). Three individuals reviewed all forms independently, compared results, and jointly resolved discrepancies. A fourth independent reviewer confirmed all results.
Most states and territories (45 of 56) accept the Federation Credentials Verification Service (FCVS), but 33 states have their own VOT forms. Ten states require FCVS use. Most states ask questions regarding probation (43), disciplinary action (41), and investigation (37). Thirty-four states and territories ask about documents placed on file, 36 ask about resident actions, and 7 ask about non-disciplinary actions. Eight states' VOT forms ask no questions regarding resident performance.
Among the states and territories, there is great variability in VOT forms required for allopathic physicians. These forms focus on disciplinary actions and do not ask questions PDs use to assess resident performance.
州医学许可委员会要求项目主任填写培训核实（VOT）表格以获得许可。虽然住院医师培训项目采用研究生医学教育认证委员会的核心能力标准，但许可委员会在确定是否达到学术能力方面没有统一的流程或一套指标。
我们确定了项目主任在州许可VOT表格上需要披露的绩效指标。
通过在线搜索获取了美国50个州、华盛顿特区和5个美国属地的所有opathic医学许可委员会的VOT表格并进行审查。问题按纪律处分（调查、纪律处分、缓刑、开除、终止）、存档文件、住院医师行为（请假、转科申请、无故缺勤）和非纪律处分（补救、部分或无学分、不续签、不晋升、需要额外培训）进行分类。三名人员独立审查所有表格，比较结果，并共同解决差异。第四名独立审查员确认了所有结果。
大多数州和属地（56个中的45个）接受联邦证书核实服务（FCVS），但33个州有自己的VOT表格。10个州要求使用FCVS。大多数州询问有关缓刑（43个）、纪律处分（41个）和调查（37个）的问题。34个州和属地询问存档文件，36个询问住院医师行为，7个询问非纪律处分。8个州的VOT表格没有询问有关住院医师表现的问题。
在各州和属地中，opathic医师所需的VOT表格存在很大差异。这些表格侧重于纪律处分，没有询问项目主任用于评估住院医师表现的问题。
