The Experts below are selected from a list of 360 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Robert R Hattery - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
american board of radiology Maintenance of Certification part iv practice quality improvement for radiation oncology
International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, 2007Co-Authors: Larry E Kun, Bruce G Haffty, Jennifer L Bosma, Janet L Strife, Robert R HatteryAbstract:Maintenance of Certification is a physician-based response to public concerns about the quality of medical care and physician competency in a rapidly evolving, technically demanding specialty. The American Board of Radiology (ABR) has previously described the first three components of the Maintenance of Certification. The ABR is currently developing a program in practice performance, completing Part IV of the competencies. The Practice Quality Improvement (PQI) program is meant to critically evaluate meaningful aspects of a physician's practice in a simple manner, using identifiable metrics and self-assessment to include an action plan for quality improvement. Each diplomate will be expected to complete three PQI projects during a full 10-year Maintenance of Certification cycle. Current diplomates with time-limited certificates will find prorated requirements determined by their year of Certification on the ABR Website. Diplomates will have the option of completing zero to two Type I PQI projects (assessing factors relevant to clinical practice by peer review and self-reporting) and one to three Type II projects (i.e., at least one Type II projects of the three required, assessing parameters of practice by comparison with evidence-based guidelines, consensus statements, or peer comparisons; Type II projects are initiated and managed by professional societies). Several examples of Type I projects that might be offered by societies or directly through the ABR are provided, as well as highlights of the two Type II projects that have sought ABR qualification: the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology's Performance Assessment for the Advancement of Radiation Oncology Treatment program and American College of Radiology's RO-PEER program. An additional objective of the PQI is to develop national databases for future reference using aggregate data from the PQI projects.
-
american board of radiology Maintenance of Certification part iv practice quality improvement for radiation oncology
International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, 2007Co-Authors: Bruce G Haffty, Jennifer L Bosma, Janet L Strife, Robert R HatteryAbstract:Maintenance of Certification is a physician-based response to public concerns about the quality of medical care and physician competency in a rapidly evolving, technically demanding specialty. The American Board of Radiology (ABR) has previously described the first three components of the Maintenance of Certification. The ABR is currently developing a program in practice performance, completing Part IV of the competencies. The Practice Quality Improvement (PQI) program is meant to critically evaluate meaningful aspects of a physician's practice in a simple manner, using identifiable metrics and self-assessment to include an action plan for quality improvement. Each diplomate will be expected to complete three PQI projects during a full 10-year Maintenance of Certification cycle. Current diplomates with time-limited certificates will find prorated requirements determined by their year of Certification on the ABR Website. Diplomates will have the option of completing zero to two Type I PQI projects (assessing factors relevant to clinical practice by peer review and self-reporting) and one to three Type II projects ( i.e ., at least one Type II projects of the three required, assessing parameters of practice by comparison with evidence-based guidelines, consensus statements, or peer comparisons; Type II projects are initiated and managed by professional societies). Several examples of Type I projects that might be offered by societies or directly through the ABR are provided, as well as highlights of the two Type II projects that have sought ABR qualification: the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology's Performance Assessment for the Advancement of Radiation Oncology Treatment program and American College of Radiology's RO-PEER program. An additional objective of the PQI is to develop national databases for future reference using aggregate data from the PQI projects.
-
american board of radiology perspective on Maintenance of Certification part iv practice quality improvement for diagnostic radiology
Radiographics, 2007Co-Authors: Janet L Strife, Jennifer L Bosma, Gary J Becker, Reed N Dunnick, Robert R HatteryAbstract:1All authors: The American Board of Radiology, 5441 E Williams Blvd., Tucson, AZ 85711. Address correspondence to J. L. Strife. he American public expects safe, predictable, high-quality care and assumes that physicians work to remain current and competent. The American Board of Radiology (ABR) encourages each board-certified diagnostic radiologist to understand his or her professional responsibilities and to participate in continuous quality improvement and lifelong learning. In the United States health care system, quality of care, medical error reduction, and patient safety represent continuing themes that dominate public concern [1–3]. Maintenance of Certification (MOC), the overarching program of the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) and its member boards, is the response of U.S. physicians to address these concerns [4–8]. Although advances in medical science, technology, and biomedical research continue to accelerate, other barriers prevent rapid dissemination and adoption of evidence-based, recommended care [9]. A RAND Corporation study has estimated that only 50–54% of the care Americans receive is care that has been recommended on the basis of evidence-based medical literature [3]. Much of what radiologists do is not evidence based [10]. Outcomes and costs to diagnose and treat specific diseases vary widely among physicians, hospitals, health care providers, and regions of the country [10]. To address challenges in the medical system and the public’s concerns, the ABMS, composed of 24 member boards representing all medical subspecialties in the United States, mandated in March 2000 that each board initiate specialty-specific MOC programs [4–8]. Diplomates are no longer granted lifetime Certification but rather must demonstrate evidence of professionalism, continuing medical education and knowledge, as well as a commitment to practice improvement. The MOC program, including “Part IV: Practice Quality Improvement,” for diagnostic radiology, radiation oncology, and radiologic physics has been developed, approved by the ABMS, and initiated in 2007. The overriding objective of MOC is to improve the quality of health care through diplomate-initiated learning and quality improvement. There are four component parts to the MOC process: “Part I: Professional Standing,” “Part II: Lifelong Learning and Periodic Self-Assessment,” “Part III, Cognitive Expertise,” and “Part IV: Evaluation of Practice Performance” [11–15]. The ABR program for self-evaluation of practice performance is linked to a process of continuing quality improvement and is titled “Practice Quality Improvement” (PQI).
-
Maintenance of Certification
Journal of The American College of Radiology, 2005Co-Authors: John E Madewell, Robert R Hattery, Stephen R Thomas, Larry E Kun, Gary J Becker, Christopher R B Merritt, Lawrence W DavisAbstract:Maintenance of Certification (MOC) recognizes that in addition to medical knowledge, several essential elements involved in delivering quality care must be developed and maintained throughout one's career. The MOC process is designed to facilitate and document the professional development of each American Board of Radiology (ABR) diplomate through its focus on the essential elements of quality care in diagnostic radiology, its subspecialties, radiation oncology, and radiologic physics. The initial elements of the ABR's MOC program have been developed in accord with guidelines of the American Board of Medical Specialties. Further details will be developed as the process evolves.
-
american board of radiology Maintenance of Certification
Radiology, 2005Co-Authors: John E Madewell, Robert R Hattery, Stephen R Thomas, Gary J Becker, Christopher R B Merritt, Lawrence W DavisAbstract:Purpose Maintenance of Certification (MOC) recognizes that in addition to medical knowledge, several essential elements involved in delivering quality care must be developed and maintained throughout one’s career. The MOC process is designed to facilitate and document the professional development of each American Board of Radiology (ABR) diplomate through its focus on the essential elements of quality care in Diagnostic Radiology, its subspecialties, Radiation Oncology, and Radiologic Physics. The initial elements of the ABR MOC program have been developed in accord with guidelines of the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS). Further details will be developed as the process evolves.
Rebecca S Lipner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
incorporating physician input into a Maintenance of Certification examination a content validity tool
Academic Medicine, 2019Co-Authors: Paul A Poniatowski, Jeremy W Dugosh, Rebecca A Baranowski, Gerald K Arnold, Rebecca S Lipner, George W Dec, Marianne M GreenAbstract:PURPOSE As part of the American Board of Internal Medicine's (ABIM's) continuing effort to update its Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program, a content validity tool was used to conduct structured reviews of MOC exam blueprints (i.e., test specification tables) by the physician community. Results from the Cardiovascular Disease MOC blueprint review are presented to illustrate the process ABIM conducted for several internal medicine disciplines. METHOD Ratings of topic frequency and importance were collected from cardiologists in 2016 using a three-point scale (low, medium, high). The web-based survey instrument presented 188 blueprint topic descriptions, each combined with five patient-related tasks (e.g., diagnosis, treatment). Descriptive statistics and chi-square analysis were employed. RESULTS Responses from 441 review participants were analyzed. Frequency and importance ratings were aggregated as a composite statistic representing clinical relevance, and exam assembly criteria were modified to select questions, or items, addressing clinically relevant content only. Specifically, ≥ 88% of exam items now address high-importance topics, including ≤ 15% on topics that are also low frequency; and ≤ 12% of exam items now address medium-importance topics, including ≤ 3% on topics that are also low frequency. The updated blueprint has been published for test takers and provides enhanced information on content that would and would not be tested in subsequent examinations. It is linked to more detailed feedback that examinees receive on items answered incorrectly. CONCLUSIONS The blueprint review garnered valuable feedback from the physician community and provided new evidence for the content validity of the Cardiovascular Disease MOC exam.
-
associations between american board of internal medicine Maintenance of Certification status and performance on a set of healthcare effectiveness data and information set hedis process measures
Annals of Internal Medicine, 2018Co-Authors: Bradley M Gray, Jonathan L Vandergrift, James D Reschovsky, Bruce E Landon, Rebecca S LipnerAbstract:The value of the American Board of Internal Medicine's (ABIM) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program has been questioned as a marker of physician quality.To assess whether physician MOC status is associated with performance on selected Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) process measures.Annual comparisons of HEDIS process measures among physicians who did or did not maintain Certification 20 years after initial Certification.Fee-for-service Medicare.1260 general internists who were initially certified in 1991 and provided care for 85 931 Medicare patients between 2009 and 2012.Annual percentage of a physician's Medicare patients meeting each of 5 HEDIS annual or biennial standards and a composite indicating meeting all 3 HEDIS diabetes standards.Among the 1260 physicians, 786 maintained their Certification from 1991 to 2012 and 474 did not. The mean annual percentage of HEDIS-eligible diabetic patients who completed semiannual hemoglobin A1c testing was 58.4% among physicians who maintained Certification and 54.4% among those who did not (regression-adjusted difference, 4.2 percentage points [95% CI, 2.0 to 6.5 percentage points]; P < 0.001). Diabetic patients of physicians who maintained Certification more frequently met the annual standard for low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol measurement (83.1% vs. 80.5%; regression-adjusted difference, 2.3 percentage points [CI, 0.6 to 4.1 percentage points]; P = 0.008) and all 3 diabetic standards (46.0% vs. 41.6%; regression-adjusted difference, 3.1 percentage points [CI, 0.5 to 5.7 percentage points]; P = 0.019). The regression-adjusted difference in biennial eye examinations was statistically insignificant (P = 0.112). Measures for LDL cholesterol testing in patients with coronary heart disease and biennial mammography were also met more frequently among physicians who maintained Certification (79.4% vs. 77.4% and 72.0% vs. 67.8%, respectively), with regression-adjusted differences of 1.7 percentage points (CI, 0.2 to 3.3 percentage points; P = 0.032) and 4.6 percentage points (CI, 2.9 to 6.3 percentage points; P < 0.001), respectively.Potential confounding by unobserved patient, physician, and practice characteristics; inability to determine clinical significance of observed differences.Maintaining Certification was positively associated with physician performance scores on a set of HEDIS process measures.American Board of Internal Medicine.
-
associations between american board of internal medicine Maintenance of Certification status and performance on a set of healthcare effectiveness data and information set hedis process measures
Annals of Internal Medicine, 2018Co-Authors: Bradley M Gray, Jonathan L Vandergrift, James D Reschovsky, Bruce E Landon, Rebecca S LipnerAbstract:Background: The value of the American Board of Internal Medicine's (ABIM) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program has been questioned as a marker of physician quality. Objective: To assess whether physician MOC status is associated with performance on selected Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) process measures. Design: Annual comparisons of HEDIS process measures among physicians who did or did not maintain Certification 20 years after initial Certification. Setting: Fee-for-service Medicare. Participants: 1260 general internists who were initially certified in 1991 and provided care for 85 931 Medicare patients between 2009 and 2012. Measurements: Annual percentage of a physician's Medicare patients meeting each of 5 HEDIS annual or biennial standards and a composite indicating meeting all 3 HEDIS diabetes standards. Results: Among the 1260 physicians, 786 maintained their Certification from 1991 to 2012 and 474 did not. The mean annual percentage of HEDIS-eligible diabetic patients who completed semiannual hemoglobin A1c testing was 58.4% among physicians who maintained Certification and 54.4% among those who did not (regression-adjusted difference, 4.2 percentage points [95% CI, 2.0 to 6.5 percentage points]; P < 0.001). Diabetic patients of physicians who maintained Certification more frequently met the annual standard for low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol measurement (83.1% vs. 80.5%; regression-adjusted difference, 2.3 percentage points [CI, 0.6 to 4.1 percentage points]; P = 0.008) and all 3 diabetic standards (46.0% vs. 41.6%; regression-adjusted difference, 3.1 percentage points [CI, 0.5 to 5.7 percentage points]; P = 0.019). The regression-adjusted difference in biennial eye examinations was statistically insignificant (P = 0.112). Measures for LDL cholesterol testing in patients with coronary heart disease and biennial mammography were also met more frequently among physicians who maintained Certification (79.4% vs. 77.4% and 72.0% vs. 67.8%, respectively), with regression-adjusted differences of 1.7 percentage points (CI, 0.2 to 3.3 percentage points; P = 0.032) and 4.6 percentage points (CI, 2.9 to 6.3 percentage points; P < 0.001), respectively. Limitation: Potential confounding by unobserved patient, physician, and practice characteristics; inability to determine clinical significance of observed differences. Conclusion: Maintaining Certification was positively associated with physician performance scores on a set of HEDIS process measures. Primary Funding Source: American Board of Internal Medicine.
-
the american board of internal medicine Maintenance of Certification examination and state medical board disciplinary actions a population cohort study
Journal of General Internal Medicine, 2018Co-Authors: Furman S Mcdonald, Gerald K Arnold, Lauren M Duhigg, Ruth M Hafer, Rebecca S LipnerAbstract:Some have questioned whether successful performance in the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program is meaningful. The association of the ABIM Internal Medicine (IM) MOC examination with state medical board disciplinary actions is unknown. To assess risk of disciplinary actions among general internists who did and did not pass the MOC examination within 10 years of initial Certification. Historical population cohort study. The population of internists certified in internal medicine, but not a subspecialty, from 1990 through 2003 (n = 47,971). ABIM IM MOC examination. General internal medicine in the USA. The primary outcome measure was time to disciplinary action assessed in association with whether the physician passed the ABIM IM MOC examination within 10 years of initial Certification, adjusted for training, Certification, demographic, and regulatory variables including state medical board Continuing Medical Education (CME) requirements. The risk for discipline among physicians who did not pass the IM MOC examination within the 10 year requirement window was more than double than that of those who did pass the examination (adjusted HR 2.09; 95% CI, 1.83 to 2.39). Disciplinary actions did not vary by state CME requirements (adjusted HR 1.02; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.16), but declined with increasing MOC examination scores (Kendall’s tau-b coefficient = − 0.98 for trend, p < 0.001). Among disciplined physicians, actions were less severe among those passing the IM MOC examination within the 10-year requirement window than among those who did not pass the examination. Passing a periodic assessment of medical knowledge is associated with decreased state medical board disciplinary actions, an important quality outcome of relevance to patients and the profession.
-
association between the american board of internal medicine s general internist s Maintenance of Certification requirement and mammography screening for medicare beneficiaries
Womens Health Issues, 2018Co-Authors: Bradley M Gray, Jonathan L Vandergrift, Rebecca S LipnerAbstract:Abstract Background Breast cancer is a leading cause of death in the United States. Continuing medical education programs such as the American Board of Internal Medicine's Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program can increase early detection of cancers by educating physicians about the benefits of screening. Did the imposition of American Board of Internal Medicine's MOC requirement affect guideline-compliant mammography screening? Method To address this question, we took advantage of a natural experiment that occurred when one group of general internists was required to complete MOC by 2001 because they initially certified in 1991 (MOC required) and another group was grandfathered out of this requirement because they initially certified in 1989 (MOC grandfathers). To measure associations with the MOC requirement, we compared mammography screening in the 2 years before and the 3 years after the 2001 MOC requirement among beneficiaries treated by the MOC-required physicians and compared this difference with the same difference in mammography screening among a control group of beneficiaries treated by the MOC-grandfathered physicians. Results We found that the MOC requirement was associated with a regression adjusted 2.8% increase (p Conclusions The MOC requirement was associated with an improvement in guideline-compliant mammography screening with the most pronounced improvements among women who were the least adherent at baseline and therefore might have benefited the most from screening.
Jay S. Balachandran - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
implementation of a professional society core curriculum and integrated Maintenance of Certification program
Annals of the American Thoracic Society, 2017Co-Authors: Graham W Carlos, Gaetane Michaud, Andrew M. Luks, Debra Boyer, Paul E. Moore, Jakob I. Mcsparron, Margaret M. Hayes, Jason Poston, Charles Dela S Cruz, Jay S. BalachandranAbstract:Medical professional societies exist to foster collaboration, guide career development, and provide continuing medical education opportunities. Maintenance of Certification is a process by which physicians complete formal educational activities approved by certifying organizations. The American Thoracic Society (ATS) established an innovative Maintenance of Certification program in 2012 as a means to formalize and expand continuing medical education offerings. This program is unique as it includes explicit opportunities for collaboration and career development in addition to providing continuing medical education and Maintenance of Certification credit to society members. In describing the development of this program referred to as the “Core Curriculum,” the authors highlight the ATS process for content design, stages of curriculum development, and outcomes data with an eye toward assisting other societies that seek to program similar content. The curriculum development process described is generalizable ...
-
Implementation of a professional society core curriculum and integrated Maintenance of Certification program
Annals of the American Thoracic Society, 2017Co-Authors: W. Graham Carlos, Jason T. Poston, Gaetane Michaud, Charles S. Dela Cruz, Andrew M. Luks, Debra Boyer, Paul E. Moore, Jakob I. Mcsparron, Margaret M. Hayes, Jay S. BalachandranAbstract:Medical professional societies exist to foster collaboration, guide career development, and provide continuing medical education opportunities. Maintenance of Certification is a process by which physicians complete formal educational activities approved by certifying organizations. The American Thoracic Society (ATS) established an innovative Maintenance of Certification program in 2012 as a means to formalize and expand continuing medical education offerings. This program is unique as it includes explicit opportunities for collaboration and career development in addition to providing continuing medical education and Maintenance of Certification credit to society members. In describing the development of this program referred to as the "Core Curriculum," the authors highlight the ATS process for content design, stages of curriculum development, and outcomes data with an eye toward assisting other societies that seek to program similar content. The curriculum development process described is generalizable and positively influences individual practitioners and professional societies in general, and as a result, provides a useful model for other professional societies to follow.
Gary J Becker - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
counterpoint Maintenance of Certification focus on physician concerns
Journal of The American College of Radiology, 2015Co-Authors: Milton J Guiberteau, Gary J BeckerAbstract:the implementation of a new process viewed as an added burden by physicians already coping with increased workloads, growing administrative tasks, and mounting regulatory requirements. In an article in this issue of JACR � , “Twin Dogmas of Maintenance of Certification,” the author’s stated intent is to “show how MOC is of value” while exposing “fallacies” in familiar arguments both supporting and questioning the effectiveness of MOC. In doing so, he has dutifully assembled a list of miscellaneous criticisms directed toward MOC in the frequently quoted and very public discussions between the American Board of Internal Medicine and a vocal minority of its diplomates. As such, these concerns are not necessarily pertinent to or reflective of the discussions between diplomates and the remaining 23 specialty boards that constitute the ABMS. Although comprehensive, such a lengthy recounting detracts from the fewer critical issues more widely perceived as barriers to the universal acceptance of MOC. For this reason, we wish to add to this discussion by focusing on selected issues most in need of clarification and with the greatest potential for improving physicians’ and, more specifically, radiologists’ experiences with MOC.
-
Maintenance of Certification part 2 continuous Certification
Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery, 2014Co-Authors: Joshua A Hirsch, Gary J Becker, Colin P Derdeyn, Mahesh V Jayaraman, Vincent C Traynelis, Philip M MeyersAbstract:In the first article of this series, we explored the historical development of medical specialty societies, and how this process ultimately resulted in the formation of the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS). The Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program grew out of this association as a means to ensure continuous improvement throughout each physician's career in a specialty chosen area of specialization. Neurointervention is somewhat unique in that it enjoys the participation of physicians from three different specialty boards: radiology, neurosurgery, and neurology. In order to understand the MOC process, the reader needs some information about the primary Certification process of the individual boards. Here, we will review the primary Certification and the various MOC requirements that neurointerventionalists will be exposed to through their specific parent organization: American Board of Radiology (ABR), American Board of Neurological Surgery (ABNS), and American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology (ABPN). We relied heavily on the individual specialty board websites, which will be cited throughout this text, as well as direct communication with the representatives of the three boards. In the event that the question should arise, the authors note that the order of discussion was chosen in a random fashion. ### Primary Certification The ABNS was approved as an examining board in 1940 by the action of the Advisory Board for Medical Specialties, a precursor body to the ABNS. Primary Certification by the ABNS occurs following completion of an approved educational training program, and involves both a written and an oral examination.1 Below are detailed the residency criteria, effective from 7 January 2013. Neurosurgical residency is 7 years in duration. Training begins when a full time resident enrolls in a program recognized by the ABNS and accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) via its Residency Review Committee (RRC) for Neurological Surgery. During the …
-
american board of radiology perspective on Maintenance of Certification part iv practice quality improvement for diagnostic radiology
Radiographics, 2007Co-Authors: Janet L Strife, Jennifer L Bosma, Gary J Becker, Reed N Dunnick, Robert R HatteryAbstract:1All authors: The American Board of Radiology, 5441 E Williams Blvd., Tucson, AZ 85711. Address correspondence to J. L. Strife. he American public expects safe, predictable, high-quality care and assumes that physicians work to remain current and competent. The American Board of Radiology (ABR) encourages each board-certified diagnostic radiologist to understand his or her professional responsibilities and to participate in continuous quality improvement and lifelong learning. In the United States health care system, quality of care, medical error reduction, and patient safety represent continuing themes that dominate public concern [1–3]. Maintenance of Certification (MOC), the overarching program of the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) and its member boards, is the response of U.S. physicians to address these concerns [4–8]. Although advances in medical science, technology, and biomedical research continue to accelerate, other barriers prevent rapid dissemination and adoption of evidence-based, recommended care [9]. A RAND Corporation study has estimated that only 50–54% of the care Americans receive is care that has been recommended on the basis of evidence-based medical literature [3]. Much of what radiologists do is not evidence based [10]. Outcomes and costs to diagnose and treat specific diseases vary widely among physicians, hospitals, health care providers, and regions of the country [10]. To address challenges in the medical system and the public’s concerns, the ABMS, composed of 24 member boards representing all medical subspecialties in the United States, mandated in March 2000 that each board initiate specialty-specific MOC programs [4–8]. Diplomates are no longer granted lifetime Certification but rather must demonstrate evidence of professionalism, continuing medical education and knowledge, as well as a commitment to practice improvement. The MOC program, including “Part IV: Practice Quality Improvement,” for diagnostic radiology, radiation oncology, and radiologic physics has been developed, approved by the ABMS, and initiated in 2007. The overriding objective of MOC is to improve the quality of health care through diplomate-initiated learning and quality improvement. There are four component parts to the MOC process: “Part I: Professional Standing,” “Part II: Lifelong Learning and Periodic Self-Assessment,” “Part III, Cognitive Expertise,” and “Part IV: Evaluation of Practice Performance” [11–15]. The ABR program for self-evaluation of practice performance is linked to a process of continuing quality improvement and is titled “Practice Quality Improvement” (PQI).
-
Maintenance of Certification
Journal of The American College of Radiology, 2005Co-Authors: John E Madewell, Robert R Hattery, Stephen R Thomas, Larry E Kun, Gary J Becker, Christopher R B Merritt, Lawrence W DavisAbstract:Maintenance of Certification (MOC) recognizes that in addition to medical knowledge, several essential elements involved in delivering quality care must be developed and maintained throughout one's career. The MOC process is designed to facilitate and document the professional development of each American Board of Radiology (ABR) diplomate through its focus on the essential elements of quality care in diagnostic radiology, its subspecialties, radiation oncology, and radiologic physics. The initial elements of the ABR's MOC program have been developed in accord with guidelines of the American Board of Medical Specialties. Further details will be developed as the process evolves.
-
american board of radiology Maintenance of Certification
Radiology, 2005Co-Authors: John E Madewell, Robert R Hattery, Stephen R Thomas, Gary J Becker, Christopher R B Merritt, Lawrence W DavisAbstract:Purpose Maintenance of Certification (MOC) recognizes that in addition to medical knowledge, several essential elements involved in delivering quality care must be developed and maintained throughout one’s career. The MOC process is designed to facilitate and document the professional development of each American Board of Radiology (ABR) diplomate through its focus on the essential elements of quality care in Diagnostic Radiology, its subspecialties, Radiation Oncology, and Radiologic Physics. The initial elements of the ABR MOC program have been developed in accord with guidelines of the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS). Further details will be developed as the process evolves.
Lawrence W Davis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Maintenance of Certification
Journal of The American College of Radiology, 2005Co-Authors: John E Madewell, Robert R Hattery, Stephen R Thomas, Larry E Kun, Gary J Becker, Christopher R B Merritt, Lawrence W DavisAbstract:Maintenance of Certification (MOC) recognizes that in addition to medical knowledge, several essential elements involved in delivering quality care must be developed and maintained throughout one's career. The MOC process is designed to facilitate and document the professional development of each American Board of Radiology (ABR) diplomate through its focus on the essential elements of quality care in diagnostic radiology, its subspecialties, radiation oncology, and radiologic physics. The initial elements of the ABR's MOC program have been developed in accord with guidelines of the American Board of Medical Specialties. Further details will be developed as the process evolves.
-
american board of radiology Maintenance of Certification
Radiology, 2005Co-Authors: John E Madewell, Robert R Hattery, Stephen R Thomas, Gary J Becker, Christopher R B Merritt, Lawrence W DavisAbstract:Purpose Maintenance of Certification (MOC) recognizes that in addition to medical knowledge, several essential elements involved in delivering quality care must be developed and maintained throughout one’s career. The MOC process is designed to facilitate and document the professional development of each American Board of Radiology (ABR) diplomate through its focus on the essential elements of quality care in Diagnostic Radiology, its subspecialties, Radiation Oncology, and Radiologic Physics. The initial elements of the ABR MOC program have been developed in accord with guidelines of the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS). Further details will be developed as the process evolves.
-
Maintenance of Certification
American Journal of Roentgenology, 2005Co-Authors: John E Madewell, Robert R Hattery, Stephen R Thomas, Larry E Kun, Gary J Becker, Christopher R B Merritt, Lawrence W DavisAbstract:The process of Maintenance of Certification (MOC) adopted by the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS), which comprises 24 medical specialty Boards, has recently come under fire. Although the program for MOC has met with some skepticism since its inception in 2000, recent changes to the American Board of Internal Medicine’s MOC program aimed at creating a more seamless process of continuous learning and assessment elicited a barrage of complaints and criticism from some of its Diplomates. The Trustees of the American Board of Urology (ABU) took note of this condemnation, and sought to address the misconceptions and presumptions shared by Diplomates from a variety of Boards about MOC. The program for MOC facilitates the process by which physicians uphold their inherent contract with patients as formalized in the Physician Charter: Medical Professionalism in the New Millennium. Published in 2002 by representatives from numerous international societies, the Physician Charter is almost universally endorsed by the Boards, including ABU. According to the Charter, “Physicians must be committed to lifelong learning and be responsible for maintaining the medical knowledge and clinical and team skills necessary for the provision of quality care.” It further states that “the profession as a whole must strive to see that all of its members are competent and must insure that appropriate mechanisms are available for physicians to accomplish this goal.” These statements are only a snippet of the Physician Charter but they comprise the foundation of MOC programs. Responsible for administering MOC, the Boards are committed to ensuring that its requirements are neither onerous nor frivolous. Staying current with medical knowledge is not a simple task. It is estimated that medical knowledge doubles every 8 years. At the current rate, clinicians will need to learn, unlearn and then re-learn half of their medical knowledge base
