Cognitive Screening Tools for Late Career Physicians: A Critical Review.

Screening measures are widely used in medicine to assess the increased probability that members of a defined population have a particular condition and therefore require more extensive assessment. The rationale for prospective screening of late career physicians (LCPs) is drawn from the following circumstances: Senior physicians-prone to the vicissitudes of aging-comprise nearly a third of the US physician workforce, physicians are poor at self-evaluation, data suggest many have clinically relevant cognitive decline, and screening is an evidence-based, method to detect individuals at risk and determine whether a comprehensive evaluation is necessary. A handful of professional organizations (eg, surgeons, obstetricians, and a growing number of medical staff credentialing committees) have developed policies in this arena. This focused review compares cognitive screening methods used or recommended for LCPs, with particular attention to the psychometric properties, ease of operational implementation, and appropriate application to physicians-a population selected for high cognitive reserve and skills. Further, we identify gaps in knowledge and practice, including the need for more career-span normative data on physicians' cognitive and work performance. Stakeholders can improve rehabilitation and other supports to LCPs in transition, calling upon the unique expertise of those neuropsychologists who are trained on conducting fitness for duty evaluations, as well as rehabilitation professionals who can assist in developing modifications to practice when indicated or facilitate graceful transitions to retirement when necessary.

Do physicians referred for competency evaluations have underlying cognitive problems?

PURPOSE: Research suggests that there are concerns about the neuropsychological functioning of physicians who undergo physician competency evaluation. Academic health center faculty often participate in the evaluation and remediation of these physicians. The purpose of this study was to compare the cognitive abilities between a group of physicians referred for competency evaluations and a control group. METHOD: Using the MicroCog, a computerized neuropsychological screen originally designed for physicians, the authors compared the cognitive performance of 267 physicians referred for competency evaluations with a control group of 68 recruited physicians. Physicians referred for competency evaluations took the MicroCog as a part of their evaluation at CPEP, the national Center for Personalized Education for Physicians, from January 1997 to January 2004. The control group comprised practicing physicians whose competency was not in question. RESULTS: Compared with the control group, the competency evaluation group had a greater proportion of physicians with scores suggesting possible cognitive impairment and performed significantly lower on scores of processing speed, processing accuracy, and cognitive proficiency. The control group of physicians performed significantly better than the age- and education-corrected normative sample. CONCLUSIONS: Because there were significant neuropsychological differences between physicians referred for competency evaluations and physicians whose competency was not in question, it is important that neuropsychological screening be included as part of physicians' competency evaluations.