Two recent stories (in the Minneapolis Star Tribune and the Chicago Tribune) should remind journalists, particularly those who cover health, why it’s so important to keep an eye out on the regulators who oversee doctors.

The Star Tribune series, written by Glenn Howatt and Richard Meryhew, found shocking ineptitude by Minnesota’s Board of Medical Practice. Specifically:

Since 2000, at least 46 Minnesota doctors escaped board discipline after authorities in other states took action against their licenses for such missteps as committing crimes, patient care errors or having sexual or inappropriate relationships with patients, records show.

In addition, more than half of the 74 doctors who lost their privileges to work in Minnesota hospitals and clinics over the past decade were never disciplined by the Minnesota board, according to a federal database used by the health care industry to track actions against physicians. At least 13 of the 47 doctors who avoided discipline were flagged for incompetence, substandard care or inadequate skills.

Minnesota’s board also has consistently declined to keep the public informed about problem practitioners by not publicizing malpractice awards and other adverse actions that are routinely disclosed in states from California to North Carolina.

One woman injured by a chemical peel who won a $1 million jury award from a dermatologist puzzled over why the medical board took no action against him. “Where are you, board?” the woman told reporters. “How many women have to be injured?”

Separately, the Tribune’s Deborah L. Shelton found similar problems in Illinois.

Six years ago, Oklahoma took away the medical license of a physician over sexual misconduct. A managed care organization in that state took emergency action to suspend the doctor’s clinical privileges, and New York also revoked the doctor’s license to practice there.

Four years ago, the doctor was kicked out of Medicare and other federal health programs for a felony conviction having to do with controlled substances. The physician, who at some point has held a license to practice in Illinois, has settled at least a half-dozen malpractice cases. One involved brain damage in a patient who was left a quadriplegic. The doctor also has been sued over allegations of sexual misconduct and dispensing the wrong medication.

All of this information would be available to Illinois regulators if they looked for it. The National Practitioner Data Bank, established by federal law, collects it to help identify “problem doctors” and prevent them from moving from state to state.

But unlike officials in many states, the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation does not regularly query the databank for information about actions taken against the state’s physicians.

As of September, there is no record in the databank of the IDFPR’s taking any disciplinary action against this doctor, whose identity is cloaked from public view but available to medical board officials.

Kudos to both newspapers for keeping state regulators honest. More reporters should do that.

At the same time, both stories point out the importance of the National Practitioner Data Bank, a federally maintained database of disciplined doctors. The information in the database is not publicly accessible, but the government maintains a Public Use File with deidentified information that has helped reporters cover their state medical boards. Federal officials last year took the file offline and then put restrictions on how reporters can use the records that are unworkable and likely unconstitutional. The Association of Health Care Journalists has been fighting to have them overturned.

These two stories show why the data bank is important and why reporters need to be able to access the information in it.