A survey and review of telemedicine license portability

Herbert J. Rogove, Benjamin Amoateng, Jennifer Binner, Bart M Demaerschalk, Richard B. Sanders

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: One of the major barriers to the practice of telemedicine is the state-to-state inconsistency and variability of requirements for physicians to obtain a medical license. Materials and Methods: Invitations were extended to 61 individuals, representing 21 companies and healthcare systems. The participants had to meet strict inclusion criteria. Health professionals who process well over 1,000 applicants a year were provided a 30-question survey asking about state medical boards and their assessment, including ease of obtaining a license as well as difficulties. Results: Responses were received from 40 of 61 (66%) individuals. Responders ranked their expectations of state medical boards for the following qualities: responsiveness to questions, cooperation, willingness to expedite the application, and knowledge. Although 46% of respondents perceived the state medical board licensing to be reasonable, 54% reported a prolonged application process owing to variable requirements and a deficiency of board office assistance. When respondents were asked about difficulty in dealing with the state medical boards, the reasons listed included the following: failure to respond to e-mails or calls, failure to provide updates on missing content, lack of cooperation, lack of uniform process/consistency, provision of erroneous information, and failure to use the Federation Credentials Verification Service. Lost documents was a problem in that 79% had to resubmit documents that were lost. Conclusions: The rapid growth of telemedicine is consistently meeting resistance because of the timely, costly, and variable process of medical license portability. A survey of professionals who, combined, annually process over 1,000 applications revealed major disparities among states. The survey demonstrated delayed responsiveness by the medical board, lost documents, and lack of access online as to the current applicant's status. Many of the respondents felt a standardized process or even a national license was a viable solution. Several models for a solution are presented.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)374-381
Number of pages8
JournalTelemedicine and e-Health
Volume21
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2015

Fingerprint

Telemedicine
Licensure
Postal Service
Surveys and Questionnaires
Delivery of Health Care
Physicians
Health
Growth

Keywords

  • barriers to telemedicine
  • medical license portability
  • state medical boards

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Health Informatics
  • Health Information Management

Cite this

A survey and review of telemedicine license portability. / Rogove, Herbert J.; Amoateng, Benjamin; Binner, Jennifer; Demaerschalk, Bart M; Sanders, Richard B.

In: Telemedicine and e-Health, Vol. 21, No. 5, 01.05.2015, p. 374-381.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rogove, HJ, Amoateng, B, Binner, J, Demaerschalk, BM & Sanders, RB 2015, 'A survey and review of telemedicine license portability', Telemedicine and e-Health, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 374-381. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2014.0116
Rogove, Herbert J. ; Amoateng, Benjamin ; Binner, Jennifer ; Demaerschalk, Bart M ; Sanders, Richard B. / A survey and review of telemedicine license portability. In: Telemedicine and e-Health. 2015 ; Vol. 21, No. 5. pp. 374-381.
@article{d34810dba041458da6975dac84562f73,
title = "A survey and review of telemedicine license portability",
abstract = "Background: One of the major barriers to the practice of telemedicine is the state-to-state inconsistency and variability of requirements for physicians to obtain a medical license. Materials and Methods: Invitations were extended to 61 individuals, representing 21 companies and healthcare systems. The participants had to meet strict inclusion criteria. Health professionals who process well over 1,000 applicants a year were provided a 30-question survey asking about state medical boards and their assessment, including ease of obtaining a license as well as difficulties. Results: Responses were received from 40 of 61 (66{\%}) individuals. Responders ranked their expectations of state medical boards for the following qualities: responsiveness to questions, cooperation, willingness to expedite the application, and knowledge. Although 46{\%} of respondents perceived the state medical board licensing to be reasonable, 54{\%} reported a prolonged application process owing to variable requirements and a deficiency of board office assistance. When respondents were asked about difficulty in dealing with the state medical boards, the reasons listed included the following: failure to respond to e-mails or calls, failure to provide updates on missing content, lack of cooperation, lack of uniform process/consistency, provision of erroneous information, and failure to use the Federation Credentials Verification Service. Lost documents was a problem in that 79{\%} had to resubmit documents that were lost. Conclusions: The rapid growth of telemedicine is consistently meeting resistance because of the timely, costly, and variable process of medical license portability. A survey of professionals who, combined, annually process over 1,000 applications revealed major disparities among states. The survey demonstrated delayed responsiveness by the medical board, lost documents, and lack of access online as to the current applicant's status. Many of the respondents felt a standardized process or even a national license was a viable solution. Several models for a solution are presented.",
keywords = "barriers to telemedicine, medical license portability, state medical boards",
author = "Rogove, {Herbert J.} and Benjamin Amoateng and Jennifer Binner and Demaerschalk, {Bart M} and Sanders, {Richard B.}",
year = "2015",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/tmj.2014.0116",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "374--381",
journal = "Telemedicine Journal and e-Health",
issn = "1530-5627",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A survey and review of telemedicine license portability

AU - Rogove, Herbert J.

AU - Amoateng, Benjamin

AU - Binner, Jennifer

AU - Demaerschalk, Bart M

AU - Sanders, Richard B.

PY - 2015/5/1

Y1 - 2015/5/1

N2 - Background: One of the major barriers to the practice of telemedicine is the state-to-state inconsistency and variability of requirements for physicians to obtain a medical license. Materials and Methods: Invitations were extended to 61 individuals, representing 21 companies and healthcare systems. The participants had to meet strict inclusion criteria. Health professionals who process well over 1,000 applicants a year were provided a 30-question survey asking about state medical boards and their assessment, including ease of obtaining a license as well as difficulties. Results: Responses were received from 40 of 61 (66%) individuals. Responders ranked their expectations of state medical boards for the following qualities: responsiveness to questions, cooperation, willingness to expedite the application, and knowledge. Although 46% of respondents perceived the state medical board licensing to be reasonable, 54% reported a prolonged application process owing to variable requirements and a deficiency of board office assistance. When respondents were asked about difficulty in dealing with the state medical boards, the reasons listed included the following: failure to respond to e-mails or calls, failure to provide updates on missing content, lack of cooperation, lack of uniform process/consistency, provision of erroneous information, and failure to use the Federation Credentials Verification Service. Lost documents was a problem in that 79% had to resubmit documents that were lost. Conclusions: The rapid growth of telemedicine is consistently meeting resistance because of the timely, costly, and variable process of medical license portability. A survey of professionals who, combined, annually process over 1,000 applications revealed major disparities among states. The survey demonstrated delayed responsiveness by the medical board, lost documents, and lack of access online as to the current applicant's status. Many of the respondents felt a standardized process or even a national license was a viable solution. Several models for a solution are presented.

AB - Background: One of the major barriers to the practice of telemedicine is the state-to-state inconsistency and variability of requirements for physicians to obtain a medical license. Materials and Methods: Invitations were extended to 61 individuals, representing 21 companies and healthcare systems. The participants had to meet strict inclusion criteria. Health professionals who process well over 1,000 applicants a year were provided a 30-question survey asking about state medical boards and their assessment, including ease of obtaining a license as well as difficulties. Results: Responses were received from 40 of 61 (66%) individuals. Responders ranked their expectations of state medical boards for the following qualities: responsiveness to questions, cooperation, willingness to expedite the application, and knowledge. Although 46% of respondents perceived the state medical board licensing to be reasonable, 54% reported a prolonged application process owing to variable requirements and a deficiency of board office assistance. When respondents were asked about difficulty in dealing with the state medical boards, the reasons listed included the following: failure to respond to e-mails or calls, failure to provide updates on missing content, lack of cooperation, lack of uniform process/consistency, provision of erroneous information, and failure to use the Federation Credentials Verification Service. Lost documents was a problem in that 79% had to resubmit documents that were lost. Conclusions: The rapid growth of telemedicine is consistently meeting resistance because of the timely, costly, and variable process of medical license portability. A survey of professionals who, combined, annually process over 1,000 applications revealed major disparities among states. The survey demonstrated delayed responsiveness by the medical board, lost documents, and lack of access online as to the current applicant's status. Many of the respondents felt a standardized process or even a national license was a viable solution. Several models for a solution are presented.

KW - barriers to telemedicine

KW - medical license portability

KW - state medical boards

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84929161489&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84929161489&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/tmj.2014.0116

DO - 10.1089/tmj.2014.0116

M3 - Article

VL - 21

SP - 374

EP - 381

JO - Telemedicine Journal and e-Health

JF - Telemedicine Journal and e-Health

SN - 1530-5627

IS - 5

ER -