CMPI and the Healthcare Communications Coalition of America held a Capitol Hill briefing on continuing medical education today. It was likely the first time that people who actually provide CME (or serve as partipants and attendants) presented both the facts and their viewpoint in Washington.
We made no bones about the fact that the briefing would make the case for CME and thanks to our panelists, we did not fail in this task. George Lundberg, the Editor in Chief of Medscape, made the point that most doctors like CME because they learn things from it that allow them to be better doctors, a theme restated by other participants.
Moreover, it became clear that the charges of bias-because-of-commercialism were being leveled by interests who themselves are mired in commercialism and stand to gain from and elimination of the commercial provision of CME. Further, the assaults on industry support of CME has discouraged investment according those in the trenches (Marissa Seligman Chief of Clinical Regulatory Affairs for Pri-Med, the largest commercial provider of CME for primary care physicians, Jack Lewin, president of the American College of Cardiology). Also discussed are the risk of undermining primary care and underserved populations. Data was presented by Dr. Leonard Bielory, Tom Sullivan of Rockpointe, and Jeff Drezner, CEO of Clinical Care Options in support of the claim that CME does improve clinical practice. Dr. Lundberg referenced a JAMA study showing that online CME is highly effective compared to CME workshops. And more data is widely available in medical journals underscoring this point.
CME should be part of an overall approach to making medicine more patient-centered, increasing access to health care in medically underserved communities and improving health outcomes. None of this achievable by banning or discouraging industry support for CME. On the contrary we need more CME, not less.
That was (and is) our message.
We made no bones about the fact that the briefing would make the case for CME and thanks to our panelists, we did not fail in this task. George Lundberg, the Editor in Chief of Medscape, made the point that most doctors like CME because they learn things from it that allow them to be better doctors, a theme restated by other participants.
Moreover, it became clear that the charges of bias-because-of-commercialism were being leveled by interests who themselves are mired in commercialism and stand to gain from and elimination of the commercial provision of CME. Further, the assaults on industry support of CME has discouraged investment according those in the trenches (Marissa Seligman Chief of Clinical Regulatory Affairs for Pri-Med, the largest commercial provider of CME for primary care physicians, Jack Lewin, president of the American College of Cardiology). Also discussed are the risk of undermining primary care and underserved populations. Data was presented by Dr. Leonard Bielory, Tom Sullivan of Rockpointe, and Jeff Drezner, CEO of Clinical Care Options in support of the claim that CME does improve clinical practice. Dr. Lundberg referenced a JAMA study showing that online CME is highly effective compared to CME workshops. And more data is widely available in medical journals underscoring this point.
CME should be part of an overall approach to making medicine more patient-centered, increasing access to health care in medically underserved communities and improving health outcomes. None of this achievable by banning or discouraging industry support for CME. On the contrary we need more CME, not less.
That was (and is) our message.
