We have the following questions to ask regarding the renewal of registrations and tagging it to CME Credits. Will some one answer them?
- As of now, there is no provision in the Indian Medical Council Act and in the Medical Registration Act of most states and union territories for renewal of registration of medical practitioners. How can only some states insist on renewals?
- As of now, there is no provision in the Indian Medical Council Act for linking mandatory CME credit hours with renewal of registration of medical practitioners. Why should these two be tagged together?
- As of now, there is no provision in the Indian Medical Council Act, or in the Scheme proposed by the executive committee of the MCI, for accreditation of CME Programmes, their inspection, the fees/TA/DA or the exalted positions etc., for the inspectors of the CME programmes. Some state councils accredit the organizations that conduct CME programmes, and some want to inspect each and every CME programme directly. Why do the medical councils have no faith in the medical associations? Why do these associations submit themselves for such inspections? How and why should such inspections be allowed?
- There is no uniformity among the state medical councils with regard to the allotment of credit hours for various activities and for different designations and also for exemption according to age. Why should medical practitioners of some states suffer? And in the bargain, be forced to attend more programmes and spend more money?
- The basis for allotment of credit hours for various activities remains unclear. How can the councils regulating evidence based medicine act without any basis?
- The basis for awarding credit hours to medical teachers and other senior officials while not awarding the same to senior and knowledgeable consultants unattached to medical colleges, many of whom are well recognized resource persons for CME/Conferences at national and international levels, is also unclear. Why should the medical councils discriminate?
- The basis for appointing the so-called inspectors of CME Programmes is also unclear. Their credentials, their updatedness, their knowledge to assess the relevance and updatedness of the lectures are all unclear. Can the medical councils appoint such inspectors arbitrarily?
- The necessary credentials and updatedness of the resource persons are also not clear. How can speakers with different qualifications, for example, a qualified endocrinologist, an internist and a general practitioner, speaking on the same topic, say diabetes, qualify for the same 1 hour credit?
- A medical practitioner has several means to update him/herself – textbooks, journals, peer interactions, online resources etc. That being the case, how can the medical councils insist that only CME programmes/conferences/workshops, that too of certain duration, be the only method of updating and earning credits? What is the guarantee that everyone attending a CME is automatically updated and someone not attending is not?
- Some of the states that amended their Medical Registration Acts started enforcing the renewals after a gap of 8-10 years. Why are they now in a hurry? Why can’t they wait until our parliament amends the IMC Act mandating renewals?
- It appears that most medical councils have initiated the process of renewal and/or CME Credits rather hurriedly and without much diligence. Why so?
- And if this report is to be believed, several suspicions and uncomfortable questions also arise. When the medical councils do not trust the medical associations and subject their programmes for inspections, what is the guarantee that these very inspections are incorruptible and trustworthy?
Is it not prudent, therefore, to keep this entire process of renewal of registration tagged with CME credits under suspension until the Parliament of India amends the Indian Medical Council Act suitably?
May we also request the powers-that-be to first ensure highest standards of medical education in the country before embarking on this process of CME-for-Renewal?