American Board of Ophthalmology Certifying Examination Performance and Opioid Prescription Patterns

Matthew R. Starr, Sarah Schnabel, George B. Bartley
{"title":"American Board of Ophthalmology Certifying Examination Performance and Opioid Prescription Patterns","authors":"Matthew R. Starr, Sarah Schnabel, George B. Bartley","doi":"10.30770/2572-1852-109.3.12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To compare opioid prescription patterns of ophthalmologists based on performance on the American Board of Ophthalmology (ABO) written qualifying examination (WQE) and oral certifying examinations (OE). All ophthalmologists within the Medicare Prescriber Part D Database from 2013 – 2018 who attempted the ABO, WQE, or OE were included. Opioid prescription data were analyzed based on ABO certification status: certified on first attempt, failed but then certified, and never certified. There were 6822 ophthalmologists with 32258 records in the Medicare database during the study period with ABO data available. The point estimate for total opioid prescriptions per year was 7.3, standard error (SE) 0.3 for ophthalmologists who were certified on the first attempt (reference). The estimate for those who failed one or both qualifying examinations, but then became board certified (BC) was −1.7, SE 0.6 (p = 0.0031); and the estimate for those ophthalmologists who never became BC was +0.8, SE 1.5 (p = 0.5318). The point estimate for cost of opioids prescribed per year was $55.17, SE 4.4 for ophthalmologists who were certified on the first attempt, with the estimate for those who failed one or both qualifying examinations, but then became BC being $−12.29, SE 8.7 (p = 0.1581); and for those ophthalmologists who never became BC being +$69.54, SE 21.7 (p = 0.0014). Diplomates who initially failed one or both qualifying exams, but who ultimately became certified, prescribed less opioids, less costly opioids, and less supply of opioids within the Medicare Part D database compared to non-BC ophthalmologists.","PeriodicalId":91752,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical regulation","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of medical regulation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30770/2572-1852-109.3.12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To compare opioid prescription patterns of ophthalmologists based on performance on the American Board of Ophthalmology (ABO) written qualifying examination (WQE) and oral certifying examinations (OE). All ophthalmologists within the Medicare Prescriber Part D Database from 2013 – 2018 who attempted the ABO, WQE, or OE were included. Opioid prescription data were analyzed based on ABO certification status: certified on first attempt, failed but then certified, and never certified. There were 6822 ophthalmologists with 32258 records in the Medicare database during the study period with ABO data available. The point estimate for total opioid prescriptions per year was 7.3, standard error (SE) 0.3 for ophthalmologists who were certified on the first attempt (reference). The estimate for those who failed one or both qualifying examinations, but then became board certified (BC) was −1.7, SE 0.6 (p = 0.0031); and the estimate for those ophthalmologists who never became BC was +0.8, SE 1.5 (p = 0.5318). The point estimate for cost of opioids prescribed per year was $55.17, SE 4.4 for ophthalmologists who were certified on the first attempt, with the estimate for those who failed one or both qualifying examinations, but then became BC being $−12.29, SE 8.7 (p = 0.1581); and for those ophthalmologists who never became BC being +$69.54, SE 21.7 (p = 0.0014). Diplomates who initially failed one or both qualifying exams, but who ultimately became certified, prescribed less opioids, less costly opioids, and less supply of opioids within the Medicare Part D database compared to non-BC ophthalmologists.
美国眼科委员会认证考试成绩与阿片类药物处方模式
根据眼科医生在美国眼科医师资格考试(ABO)笔试(WQE)和口试(OE)中的表现,比较眼科医生的阿片类药物处方模式。 2013-2018年期间,联邦医疗保险D部分处方数据库中所有参加过ABO、WQE或OE考试的眼科医生均被纳入其中。阿片类药物处方数据根据 ABO 认证状态进行分析:首次尝试获得认证、未通过但随后获得认证以及从未获得认证。 在研究期间,医疗保险数据库中共有 6822 名眼科医生的 32258 条记录提供了 ABO 数据。对于首次通过认证的眼科医生(参考),每年阿片类药物处方总量的点估算值为 7.3,标准误差 (SE) 为 0.3。一次或两次资格考试均未通过,但随后获得认证(BC)的眼科医生的估计值为-1.7,标准误差为 0.6(p = 0.0031);从未获得认证的眼科医生的估计值为+0.8,标准误差为 1.5(p = 0.5318)。首次获得资格认证的眼科医生每年处方阿片类药物的成本点估算值为 55.17 美元,SE 为 4.4,其中一次或两次资格考试均未通过,但随后获得资格认证的眼科医生的成本估算值为 12.29 美元,SE 为 8.7 (p = 0.1581);从未获得资格认证的眼科医生的成本估算值为 +69.54 美元,SE 为 21.7 (p = 0.0014)。 与未获得认证的眼科医生相比,最初未能通过一次或两次资格考试但最终获得认证的眼科医生在医疗保险 D 部分数据库中开具的阿片类药物处方较少,阿片类药物的成本较低,阿片类药物的供应量也较少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信