fb-pixelPatients deserve more data on physicians with poor records - The Boston Globe Skip to main content
Editorial

Patients deserve more data on physicians with poor records

MOST PEOPLE wouldn’t buy a washing machine without doing significant research on the reliability of the product. Yet they are expected to choose a doctor without access to reliable data.

In 1996, when the Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine launched its physician profiles, it promised a new era for the “informed patient.’’ That turned out to be a false promise for the growing number of patients who face the task of choosing an unfamiliar doctor from health plan lists. If anything, other states have shot ahead of Massachusetts.

It doesn’t take much effort for bungling doctors to escape detection - or this state - with their reputations intact. Massachusetts is one of just three states where the medical board removes the online profiles of physicians who lose or fail to renew their licenses. And it’s one of just four states that deletes disciplinary and malpractice violations from a physician’s profile after 10 years. Some of the law’s other provisions defy logic. For example, the board posts the information when a doctor loses clinical privileges at hospitals only. Yet 80 percent of medicine is practiced in non-hospital settings, such as nursing homes.

Now, the Legislature should go back to the drawing board and create an easy-to-use platform that gives patients all the information they need to choose a physician. The state clearly erred when it mandated the sanitization of doctor’s online profiles after 10 years, resulting in the purging of nearly 3,000 malpractice payments made by Massachusetts physicians from 1990 to 2001, according to a report earlier this month by the Northeastern University Initiative for Investigative Journalism.

Advertisement



And while waiting for legislative action, the board should take administrative actions on its own to restore patient confidence, such as retaining profiles after a doctor forfeits his or her license. That would at least help protect patients against doctors who set up practice in another state.

Advertisement



The board expects to unveil a new online profile for physicians in the coming weeks that will include out-of-state medical convictions. That’s a step forward. But it’s still a long from providing all the data necessary for the “informed patient.’’

Such information is especially vital in today’s complicated health care world, where plans increasingly ask patients to choose from a limited network of providers. There’s nothing inherently wrong with a such a network. But it’s vital that patients have the comfort of knowing that the doctors they choose are truly qualified and have solid records. Any consumer - whether seeking an MRI or buying a new high-def TV - should expect the same.