Â鶹ֱ²¥ Releases Two Policy Statements on the Physician\u2019s Act of 2020<\/h1><\/div><\/div><\/div>Medical practice in the Philippines is regulated mainly based on the outdated RA2382 otherwise known as the Medical Act of 1959. A new bill is now being proposed to be known as the Physician\u2019s Act and being deliberated by the different medical organizations. The Â鶹ֱ²¥ formulated an evidence-based policy recommendations on certain issues i.e., regulation of post-graduate medical training and malpractice.<\/p>\n<\/div>
![](\"https:\/\/thepafp.org\/journal\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/pafp-policy-statements-2020d.jpg\" "\\"pafp-policy-statements-2020d\\"")
<\/span><\/div><\/div><\/div>Stand of the Â鶹ֱ²¥ on PGMEC as the Accrediting Body for Medical Specialty Training in the New Physicians Act<\/h1><\/div>John Michael Deblois MD, CFP, and the Â鶹ֱ²¥ Health Policy Analysis Committee<\/p>\n<\/div>
\n- The Â鶹ֱ²¥ recommend that higher professional training for post-graduate medical education must be founded upon a rigorous set of standards enforced through mechanisms that promote transparency, stakeholders\u2019 involvement and institutional accountability in the formation of medical specialists capable of delivering safe, effective and high-quality patient care. These standards should be based national needs and availability of resources.\n
\n- To achieve this, there is a need to form an independent \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council) represented by medical professionals, academic, and lay stakeholders to ensure multisectoral contribution in the formation of evidence-based standards for post-graduate medical education training.<\/li>\n
- This \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council) should be tasked to set new policies, create initiatives, enforce standards of professionalism and care, dedicates resources for the advancement of post-graduate medical education training, and offer recommendations and guidance to the different stakeholders.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
- The Â鶹ֱ²¥ recommends that the \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council) shall identify medical organizations, medical specialty societies, who will be responsible for defining the specific standards for setting, processes of training and outcomes that will make trainees in post-graduate medical education meet the set standards developed by the \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council).\n
\n- With the agreed setting, processes of training and outcomes, the \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council), medical organizations and medical specialty societies will be responsible for accrediting training programs, implementing the agreed standards of setting, process of training and outcomes.<\/li>\n
- Medical organizations and medical specialty societies shall also be responsible for recognizing and recommending innovations to the training programs for the achievement of the standards set by \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
- The Â鶹ֱ²¥ recommends that the identified medical organizations, medical specialty societies shall be delegated by the \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council) to evaluate and provide certification to the trainees of accredited training programs.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\n- <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
Â鶹ֱ²¥ Recommendation on Malpractice in the Physicians\u2019 Act of 2022<\/h1><\/div>Suzanne Langcauon MD, DFM and the Â鶹ֱ²¥ Health Policy Analysis Committee<\/p>\n<\/div>
\n- Medical malpractice presents a significant societal burden socially and economically. It resulted int the practice of defensive medicine that increased the cost of care but did not necessarily decrease malpractice.<\/li>\n
- Cases on medical malpractice should be regulated first within the physicians\u2019 organizations to better address through evidence-based facts and several clinical practice guidelines to show compliance to standard of care being delivered in the primary care level.<\/li>\n
- There is a need to change the framework of addressing malpractice with the following policies:\n
\n- Counteracting defensive medicine can be accomplished through decriminalizing malpractice, leaving physician oversight up to state medical boards and hospital claims management committees.<\/li>\n
- Malpractice peer review committees at hospitals and specialty boards may help inform medico-legal departments.<\/li>\n
- Medical malpractice reforms should be developed in accordance with the rapidly changing healthcare system.<\/li>\n
- Malpractice should be seen as an organizational accountability, coupled with strong risk management, medical error communication and resolution programs, provides the legal framework necessary for the patient-centered practice of medicine.<\/li>\n
- Patient involvement is necessary to increase clinician-patient trust and improve patient independence in the shared decision-making process of their treatment.<\/li>\n
- Maintenance of an effective communication between a multidisciplinary care team and the patient is critical for patient satisfaction, positive outcomes of care and malpractice prevention.<\/li>\n
- Civil liability takes its most familiar form in the legal duty of care owed by healthcare professionals and workers to patients.<\/li>\n
- Criminal malpractice should only be considered when after committee review, there is willful neglect or ill-treatment of a patient or highly culpable mistreatment of others that can be committed by any healthcare organization or worker is warranted.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
Medical practice in the Philippines is regulated mainly based on the outdated RA2382 otherwise known as the Medical Act of 1959. A new bill is now being proposed to be known as the Physician\u2019s Act and being deliberated by the different medical organizations. The Â鶹ֱ²¥ formulated an evidence-based policy recommendations on certain issues i.e., regulation of post-graduate medical training and malpractice.<\/p>\n<\/div>
<\/span><\/div><\/div><\/div>Stand of the Â鶹ֱ²¥ on PGMEC as the Accrediting Body for Medical Specialty Training in the New Physicians Act<\/h1><\/div>John Michael Deblois MD, CFP, and the Â鶹ֱ²¥ Health Policy Analysis Committee<\/p>\n<\/div>
\n- The Â鶹ֱ²¥ recommend that higher professional training for post-graduate medical education must be founded upon a rigorous set of standards enforced through mechanisms that promote transparency, stakeholders\u2019 involvement and institutional accountability in the formation of medical specialists capable of delivering safe, effective and high-quality patient care. These standards should be based national needs and availability of resources.\n
\n- To achieve this, there is a need to form an independent \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council) represented by medical professionals, academic, and lay stakeholders to ensure multisectoral contribution in the formation of evidence-based standards for post-graduate medical education training.<\/li>\n
- This \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council) should be tasked to set new policies, create initiatives, enforce standards of professionalism and care, dedicates resources for the advancement of post-graduate medical education training, and offer recommendations and guidance to the different stakeholders.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
- The Â鶹ֱ²¥ recommends that the \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council) shall identify medical organizations, medical specialty societies, who will be responsible for defining the specific standards for setting, processes of training and outcomes that will make trainees in post-graduate medical education meet the set standards developed by the \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council).\n
\n- With the agreed setting, processes of training and outcomes, the \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council), medical organizations and medical specialty societies will be responsible for accrediting training programs, implementing the agreed standards of setting, process of training and outcomes.<\/li>\n
- Medical organizations and medical specialty societies shall also be responsible for recognizing and recommending innovations to the training programs for the achievement of the standards set by \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
- The Â鶹ֱ²¥ recommends that the identified medical organizations, medical specialty societies shall be delegated by the \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council) to evaluate and provide certification to the trainees of accredited training programs.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\n- <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
Â鶹ֱ²¥ Recommendation on Malpractice in the Physicians\u2019 Act of 2022<\/h1><\/div>Suzanne Langcauon MD, DFM and the Â鶹ֱ²¥ Health Policy Analysis Committee<\/p>\n<\/div>
\n- Medical malpractice presents a significant societal burden socially and economically. It resulted int the practice of defensive medicine that increased the cost of care but did not necessarily decrease malpractice.<\/li>\n
- Cases on medical malpractice should be regulated first within the physicians\u2019 organizations to better address through evidence-based facts and several clinical practice guidelines to show compliance to standard of care being delivered in the primary care level.<\/li>\n
- There is a need to change the framework of addressing malpractice with the following policies:\n
\n- Counteracting defensive medicine can be accomplished through decriminalizing malpractice, leaving physician oversight up to state medical boards and hospital claims management committees.<\/li>\n
- Malpractice peer review committees at hospitals and specialty boards may help inform medico-legal departments.<\/li>\n
- Medical malpractice reforms should be developed in accordance with the rapidly changing healthcare system.<\/li>\n
- Malpractice should be seen as an organizational accountability, coupled with strong risk management, medical error communication and resolution programs, provides the legal framework necessary for the patient-centered practice of medicine.<\/li>\n
- Patient involvement is necessary to increase clinician-patient trust and improve patient independence in the shared decision-making process of their treatment.<\/li>\n
- Maintenance of an effective communication between a multidisciplinary care team and the patient is critical for patient satisfaction, positive outcomes of care and malpractice prevention.<\/li>\n
- Civil liability takes its most familiar form in the legal duty of care owed by healthcare professionals and workers to patients.<\/li>\n
- Criminal malpractice should only be considered when after committee review, there is willful neglect or ill-treatment of a patient or highly culpable mistreatment of others that can be committed by any healthcare organization or worker is warranted.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
John Michael Deblois MD, CFP, and the Â鶹ֱ²¥ Health Policy Analysis Committee<\/p>\n<\/div>
- \n
- The Â鶹ֱ²¥ recommend that higher professional training for post-graduate medical education must be founded upon a rigorous set of standards enforced through mechanisms that promote transparency, stakeholders\u2019 involvement and institutional accountability in the formation of medical specialists capable of delivering safe, effective and high-quality patient care. These standards should be based national needs and availability of resources.\n
- \n
- To achieve this, there is a need to form an independent \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council) represented by medical professionals, academic, and lay stakeholders to ensure multisectoral contribution in the formation of evidence-based standards for post-graduate medical education training.<\/li>\n
- This \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council) should be tasked to set new policies, create initiatives, enforce standards of professionalism and care, dedicates resources for the advancement of post-graduate medical education training, and offer recommendations and guidance to the different stakeholders.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
- The Â鶹ֱ²¥ recommends that the \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council) shall identify medical organizations, medical specialty societies, who will be responsible for defining the specific standards for setting, processes of training and outcomes that will make trainees in post-graduate medical education meet the set standards developed by the \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council).\n
- \n
- With the agreed setting, processes of training and outcomes, the \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council), medical organizations and medical specialty societies will be responsible for accrediting training programs, implementing the agreed standards of setting, process of training and outcomes.<\/li>\n
- Medical organizations and medical specialty societies shall also be responsible for recognizing and recommending innovations to the training programs for the achievement of the standards set by \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
- The Â鶹ֱ²¥ recommends that the identified medical organizations, medical specialty societies shall be delegated by the \u201ccertifying body\u201d (council) to evaluate and provide certification to the trainees of accredited training programs.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
- \n
- <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
Â鶹ֱ²¥ Recommendation on Malpractice in the Physicians\u2019 Act of 2022<\/h1><\/div>
Suzanne Langcauon MD, DFM and the Â鶹ֱ²¥ Health Policy Analysis Committee<\/p>\n<\/div>
- \n
- Medical malpractice presents a significant societal burden socially and economically. It resulted int the practice of defensive medicine that increased the cost of care but did not necessarily decrease malpractice.<\/li>\n
- Cases on medical malpractice should be regulated first within the physicians\u2019 organizations to better address through evidence-based facts and several clinical practice guidelines to show compliance to standard of care being delivered in the primary care level.<\/li>\n
- There is a need to change the framework of addressing malpractice with the following policies:\n
- \n
- Counteracting defensive medicine can be accomplished through decriminalizing malpractice, leaving physician oversight up to state medical boards and hospital claims management committees.<\/li>\n
- Malpractice peer review committees at hospitals and specialty boards may help inform medico-legal departments.<\/li>\n
- Medical malpractice reforms should be developed in accordance with the rapidly changing healthcare system.<\/li>\n
- Malpractice should be seen as an organizational accountability, coupled with strong risk management, medical error communication and resolution programs, provides the legal framework necessary for the patient-centered practice of medicine.<\/li>\n
- Patient involvement is necessary to increase clinician-patient trust and improve patient independence in the shared decision-making process of their treatment.<\/li>\n
- Maintenance of an effective communication between a multidisciplinary care team and the patient is critical for patient satisfaction, positive outcomes of care and malpractice prevention.<\/li>\n
- Civil liability takes its most familiar form in the legal duty of care owed by healthcare professionals and workers to patients.<\/li>\n
- Criminal malpractice should only be considered when after committee review, there is willful neglect or ill-treatment of a patient or highly culpable mistreatment of others that can be committed by any healthcare organization or worker is warranted.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
- <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>