The question that I am asked most frequently during my seminars is, “Does the Medical Advisory Panel (MAP) interfere with the effectiveness of the Medical Executive Committee (MEC)?” The MAP is a group of high-performing, well-respected physicians who review and recommend clinical priorities based on presentations by the major clinical sections and departments.

Seminar participants are concerned that the Medical Advisory Panel will usurp the authority of the Medical Executive Committee and perhaps put hospital leaders in the middle of yet another physician-physician conflict.

I believe that the Medical Advisory Committee and the Medical Executive Committee are complementary and not competitive, as seen below:

MAP

• Primary role:        Improve  communication and collaboration
• Secondary role:   Facilitate clinical priority setting

MEC

• Primary role:         Monitor and improve quality and safety
• Secondary roles:  Credential medical staff and deal with disruptive physicians

Every Medical Staff President with whom I have worked has welcomed the Medical Advisory Panel rather than feeling threatened by it. These elected leaders state that their monthly agenda is packed with quality, safety, and credentialing issues and that they have no time to look at other issues. “If we had to do clinical priority setting, we would do it poorly, and it would compromise our other duties,” one medical staff leader confided.

The benefit of a Medical Advisory Panel to the Medical Executive Committee is that the MAP can be a source of future medical staff leaders who are well versed not only in their own specialty but also in issues that concern the entire medical staff and the community at large. Several MAP members have volunteered for the six-year Medical Executive leadership track after discovering during the MAP process that they could make a difference, leveraging their knowledge and experience beyond the individual doctor-patient relationship.

The Medical Advisory Panel can entice younger physicians to participate in hospital affairs once they discover the potential for working more effectively and efficiently. By pointing out ways that hospital operations can work in a more streamlined fashion, they can improve the practice environment.

One factor uniting baby boomer and Generation X physicians is that both need to make their time count. Boomers may need to generate revenue for college, weddings, and retirement, while GenXrs generally want a more balanced lifestyle than their predecessors and to spend more time with their families. Having worked with hundreds of physicians from both groups, I have learned that both want to take great care of patients, be perceived as a solution rather than the problem, and leave a positive legacy.

What do you think?

• Have you seen benefits from physician advisory panels where you work
• Do physician advisory panels improve physician-physician as well as physician-hospital communication
• Do unexpected leaders emerge from this process

As always, I welcome your input to improve healthcare collaboration.

Kenneth H. Cohn