Editorial: Bad medicine?

Sunday, June 24, 2007 | 7:22 a.m.

Doctors in Nevada face serious discipline at a rate that is signifi cantly less than their peers across the country, according to a report by watchdog group Public Citizen. But don't draw any conclusions from that just yet.

As reported in Thursday's Las Vegas Sun by Marshall Allen, there is great contention about what the numbers mean.

Doctors say it shows the state has high standards and good doctors. Critics say it shows that doctors are escaping punishment.

A problem with the Public Citizen report is that it assumes low doctor- discipline numbers equate with lax regulation. The question it never answers is why some states, such as Nevada, have low numbers. The report itself notes that it does not assess the quality of medical care and does not examine underlying causes for the numbers, such as whether a medical board with a low disciplinary rate "has been starved for resources by the state or whether the board itself has a tendency to mete out lower (or no) forms of discipline."

Those are good points that lead to the larger question: Are state medical boards acting appropriately?

Malpractice attorneys routinely charge that doctors cover up each other's mistakes and the board fails to pursue important cases. Doctors say the state, as Dr. Bill Pierce, president of the Nevada Academy of Family Physicians, told the Sun, "rules with an iron fi st."

The truth is diffi cult to determine because medical boards, such as those in Nevada, do not offer much public information, citing confi dentiality. Dismissed complaints, for example, are not publicly reported by the Nevada Medical Board of Examiners.

In a previous study Public Citizen noted that there is a dearth of information available publicly on the Internet about doctors, and that should change. The state should be transparent with the public, clearly explaining why and how it disciplines doctors. It is the only way to ensure the public's trust.