Are you familiar with the AMA PCPI?

In the world of CME, the topic of performance improvement has been a hot buzzword over the past few years. In 2005, the American Medical Association (AMA) came up with a new format of CME called Performance Improvement CME or PI-CME. This type of CME follows a very specific, three-step process. Since we're on the topic of performance improvement, I'd also like to highlight that the AMA has a clinical quality resource called the PCPI. Here's some information about the PCPI: 

The American Medical Association (AMA)-convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement® (PCPI) is committed to enhancing quality of care and patient safety by taking the lead in the development, testing, and maintenance of evidence-based clinical performance measures and measurement resources for physicians.

The PCPI is comprised of more than 170 national medical specialty societies, state medical societies, the American Board of Medical Specialties and member boards, Council of Medical Specialty Societies, health care professional organizations, federal agencies, individual members and others interested in improving the quality and efficiency of patient care. The 23-member Executive Committee of the PCPI has broad representation. PCPI Advisory Committees address issues related to measures implementation and evaluation; measure development, methodology and oversight.

Currently, there are 266 PCPI performance measures that are available for implementation. Descriptions and specifications for PCPI performance measures are available for 42 clinical topics and conditions.

2009 Annual Physicians' CME Preferences Survey

Medical Meetings recently published its "2009 Annual Physicians' CME Preferences Survey." Keep in mind that this was a very small sample of physicians. n = 127. Physicians were given a modest incentive of  $1 to complete the survey. 

You may be surprised by some of the results, but allow me to highlight some topics that impressed me (both in good and bad ways). Below, you'll see some snippets that focus on the following topics: different types of CME providers, PI (Performance Improvement) CME, and the value of CME. (MECC = Medical Education and Communication Company):

The older folks leaned slightly toward perceiving no variance in CME quality, with 30 percent of those older than 55 not noticing a difference in quality between offerings by a MECC, an academic institution, a hospital, a medical society, or other type of provider. Of those younger than 45, just 22 percent perceived no variance, while 55 percent said that quality varied either somewhat or significantly among provider types.

Among those who did have knowledge of PI CME, only a few said that they already were participating. PI CME is “usually time-consuming and not very beneficial,” commented one respondent, while another said, “Performance improvement programs are worthless.” Other than lack of knowledge and a negative outlook toward PI CME, the main barrier people noted was, as one said, “time, time, and time.” Several also noted that the clerical and administrative work PI CME may entail can be a barrier, as can a dearth of access to electronic medical records and technical support that could enable the doc to efficiently track the data.

Despite the grumbling about the time CME takes away from their practices and the costs involved, an overwhelming 93 percent of physicians said that CME activities are either somewhat (57 percent) or extremely (36 percent) effective in meeting their needs. Six percent said they were only slightly effective, and 1 percent said they were not at all effective. Some complained that the CME activities they participated in tended not to cover cutting-edge research. Others stated they were often irrelevant to their practices, or primarily entailed reviewing basic science rather than key clinical information.

To read the entire story on Medical Meetings, click here.

AMA Continuing Physician Professional Development (CPPD) News Briefs

AMA Continuing Physician Professional Development (CPPD) News Briefs

The Winter 2010 CPPD Report is now available. Topics included in this issue:

•    Institute of Medicine report “Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education and Practice”
•    The Conjoint Committee on Continuing Medical Education: National priorities for 2010
•    The physician’s role in medication reconciliation
•    CME requirements for medical licensure renewal
•    Updates from the 2009 Interim Meeting of the AMA House of Delegates
•    AMA CPPD presentations at the Alliance for CME Annual Conference
•    Webinars available on AMA PRA Credit System and PI CME
•    AMA PRA FAQ’s

Click here to view the Winter 2010 CPPD Report.

EHR case studies

Physicians love to hear clinical cases. I've been reading through some of the case studies listed on the CCHIT site. It's inspiring to read about stories where an EHR really made a huge difference in the efficiency of a small practice. Clinicians really need more education about the different ways that an EHR can improve their performance.

The AMA is pushing for a new type of CME called Performance Improvement CME (PI-CME). The American Medical Association (AMA)-convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement® (Consortium) is committed to enhancing quality of care and patient safety by taking the lead in the development, testing, and maintenance of evidence-based clinical performance measures and measurement resources for physicians.

PI-CME is a new way of having physicians evaluate and improve their own performance. An EHR is not necessary, but it sure makes it much easier for you to implement and evaluate your own performance. At the Annual Conference of the National Task Force on CME Provider/Industry Collaboration, PI-CME was a focus topic. The ultimate goal of CME is to improve patient care and public health. There is a real opportunity for EHR companies to develop and fund so many different types of PI-CME initiatives.