MOCA-Peds: Development of a New Assessment of Medical Knowledge for Continuing Certification

The Value of Board Recertification Among Physicians

An ongoing challenge among healthcare certifying organizations is identifying an effective manner of evaluating a physician's competency. The medical field is constantly changing, with new technology, research and pharmacology available, and physicians must be kept up to date in order to properly care for their patients. Maintenance of certification and specifically, recertification exams, are used to verify that a high standard of care is consistently met across all medical specialties. However, different countries have different structures in place to ensure physicians are kept abreast of the latest medical knowledge. For instance, American physicians must recertify themselves every ten years by passing a standardized exam to maintain their credentials. In comparison, Canadian physicians are not required to pass a formal examination. This contrast puts into question the value of the recertification exam in medical professional development programs. We outline the rectification situation in both Canada and the US and recommend MOC programs similar to Canada's, which does not require a recertification examination.

Diffusion Tensor Imaging Observation of Frontal Lobe Multidirectional Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Stroke Patients with Memory Impairment

Stroke is a group of diseases caused by the sudden rupture or blockage of blood vessels in the brain that prevent blood from flowing into the brain, resulting in brain tissue damage and dysfunction. Stroke has the characteristics of high morbidity, high disability, and high mortality. To investigate the effect of multidirectional transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the prefrontal lobe in stroke memory disorder. We evaluated 60 patients with poststroke memory impairment who underwent magnetic resonance diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) during their admission to our hospital between January 2018 and December 2020. The patients were divided into the prefrontal group (n = 15), dorsolateral group (n = 15), prefrontal + dorsolateral group (n = 15), and pseudostimulation group (n = 15). Assessments using the Rivermead Behavioral Memory Test (RBMT), Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA), Lovingston Occupational Therapy Cognitive Scale (LOTCA), and frontal lobe fractional anisotropy (FA) were performed before and after treatment. The RBMT, MoCA, and LOTCA scores in the prefrontal + dorsolateral group were significantly higher than those in the dorsolateral, prefrontal, and sham groups (all P < 0.05). The posttreatment FA value of the frontal lobe was significantly higher in the prefrontal + dorsolateral group than in the dorsolateral, prefrontal, and sham stimulation groups (all P < 0.05). The FA value of the frontal lobe was significantly lower in patients with severe memory impairment than in patients with mild-moderate memory impairment (P < 0.05). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.801 (95% CI: 0.678-0.925, P < 0.05), and the optimal cut-off value was 0.34, with a sensitivity and specificity of 81.60% and 72.70%, respectively. Prefrontal lobe + dorsolateral tDCS is beneficial in the treatment of post-stroke memory impairment. The DTI FA value can be useful in determining the degree of memory impairment.

Longitudinal assessment: A strategy to improve continuing professional certification

Healthcare certification organizations carefully balance a commitment to bring value to their membership through programs that support lifelong learning and professional growth, while protecting the public by ensuring competent certified practitioners. These certifying bodies are challenged with remaining current with their maintenance of certification programs while keeping pace with the growing breadth of knowledge, industry standards and guidelines, innovative advances, and rapid technological gains in testing and assessment. Within the context of process innovation, the National Board of Certification and Recertification for Nurse Anesthetists (NBCRNA) evaluated the current landscape of Longitudinal Assessment (LA) as a potential strategy for the assessment of core knowledge as part of their Continued Professional Certification Program for Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists. This manuscript details the evaluation of LA using a Logic Model as the tool to scaffold inquiry, a review of LA literature, an environmental scan of current LA programs with identification of LA program elements available, and the results of a LA feasibility study. The findings substantiate that continued professional certification which incorporates a LA strategy can augment lifelong learning, but is not an assessment strategy that can be implemented without thoughtful planning, customization and continuous maintenance.

Concept analysis of longitudinal assessment for professional continued certification

BACKGROUND

This concept analysis presents a scholarly epistemological approach to defining the attributes, empirical referents, antecedents, and consequences of a knowledge maintenance approach-known as longitudinal assessment-to professional certification.

AIM

The analysis reports on the efforts of the National Board of Certification and Recertification for Nurse Anesthetists to explore this educational method as an approach to meet requirements for continued professional certification.

METHOD

Using the classical approach to concept analysis, the authors explore the structure and function of longitudinal assessment and define the characteristics of the concept in a way that is meaningful to the continued certification of nursing and medical professionals.

CONCLUSION

This analysis establishes a link between the goal and outcome of the continued certification process, including continuing education in nursing and medical practice, and the desirable characteristics of longitudinal assessment, which include proven principles of educational psychology. Through exploring model and borderline cases, the authors seek to demonstrate that longitudinal assessment is the best approach to foster lifelong learning of continuously evolving scientific, theoretical, and clinical knowledge in support of safe care for patients.

2019 United States Osteopathic Medical Regulatory Summit: Consensus, Recommendations, and Next Steps in Defining Osteopathic Distinctiveness

Background

Osteopathic distinctiveness is a result of professional education, identity formation, training, credentialing, and qualifications. With the advancement of a single graduate medical education (GME) accreditation system and the continued growth of the osteopathic medical profession, osteopathic distinctiveness and professional identity are seen as lacking clarity and pose a challenge.

Summit

To achieve consensus on a succinct definition of osteopathic distinctiveness and to identify steps to more clearly define and advance that distinctiveness, particularly in professional self-regulation, a representative group of osteopathic medical students, residents, physicians, and members of the licensing, GME, and undergraduate medical education (UME) communities convened the 2019 United States Osteopathic Medical Regulatory Summit in February 2019. Key features of osteopathic distinctiveness were discussed. Growth in the profession; changes in health care delivery, technology, and demographics within the profession and patient communities; and associated challenges and opportunities for osteopathic medical practice and patients were considered.

Consensus

Osteopathic medicine is a distinctive practice that brings unique, added value to patients, the public, and the health care community at large. A universal definition and common understanding of that distinctiveness is lacking. Efforts to unify messaging that defines osteopathic distinctiveness, to align the distinctive elements of osteopathic medical education and professional self-regulation across a continuum, and to advance research on care and educational program outcomes are critical to the future of the osteopathic medical profession.

Recommendations

(1) Convene a task force of groups represented at the Summit to develop a succinct and consistent message defining osteopathic distinctiveness. (2) Demonstrate uniqueness of the profession through research demonstrating efficacy of care and patient outcomes, adding to the public good. (3) Harmonize GME and UME by beginning to align entrustable professional activities with UME milestones. (4) Convene representatives from osteopathic specialty colleges and certification boards to define curricular elements across GME, certification, and osteopathic continuous certification. (5) Build on the Project in Osteopathic Medical Education and Empathy study.

Establishing the Knowledge and Skills Necessary in Pediatric Critical Care Medicine: A Systematic Approach to Practice Analysis

OBJECTIVES

To describe the practice analysis undertaken by a task force convened by the American Board of Pediatrics Pediatric Critical Care Medicine Sub-board to create a comprehensive document to guide learning and assessment within Pediatric Critical Care Medicine.

DESIGN

An in-depth practice analysis with a mixed-methods design involving a descriptive review of practice, a modified Delphi process, and a survey.

SETTING

Not applicable.

SUBJECTS

Seventy-five Pediatric Critical Care Medicine program directors and 2,535 American Board of Pediatrics Pediatric Critical Care Medicine diplomates.

INTERVENTIONS

A practice analysis document, which identifies the full breadth of knowledge and skill required for the practice of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, was developed by a task force made up of seven pediatric intensivists and a psychometrician. The document was circulated to all 75 Pediatric Critical Care Medicine fellowship program directors for review and comment and their feedback informed modifications to the draft document. Concurrently, data from creation of the practice analysis draft document were also used to update the Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, was developed by a task force made up of seven pediatric intensivists and a psychometrician. The document was circulated to all 75 Pediatrics Pediatric Critical Care Medicine fellowship program directors for review and comment and their feedback informed modifications to the draft document. Concurrently, data from creation of the practice analysis draft document were also used to update the Pediatric Critical Care Medicine content outline, which was sent to all 2,535 American Board of Pediatrics Pediatric Critical Care Medicine diplomates for review during an open-comment period between January 2019 and February 2019, and diplomate feedback was used to make updates to both the content outline and the practice analysis document.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

After review and comment by 25 Pediatric Critical Care Medicine program directors (33.3%) and 619 board-certified diplomates (24.4%), a comprehensive practice analysis document was created through a two-stage process. The final practice analysis includes 10 performance domains which parallel previously published Entrustable Professional Activities in Pediatric Critical Care Medicine. These performance domains are made up of between three and eight specific tasks, with each task including the critical knowledge and skills that are necessary for successful completion. The final practice analysis document was also used by the American Board of Pediatrics Pediatric Critical Care Medicine Sub-board to update the Pediatric Critical Care Medicine content outline.

CONCLUSIONS

A systematic approach to practice analysis, with stakeholder engagement, is essential for an accurate definition of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine practice in its totality. This collaborative process resulted in a dynamic document useful in guiding curriculum development for training programs, maintenance of certification, and lifetime professional development to enable safe and efficient patient care.

Pediatrician Perspectives on Feasibility and Acceptability of the MOCA-Peds 2017 Pilot

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The American Board of Pediatrics (ABP) certifies that general and subspecialty pediatricians meet standards of excellence established by their peers, immediately after training and over the course of their careers (ie, Maintenance of Certification [MOC]). In 2015-2016, the ABP developed the Maintenance of Certification Assessment for Pediatrics (MOCA-Peds) as an alternative assessment to the current proctored, closed-book general pediatrics (GP) MOC examination. This article is 1 of a 2-part series examining results from the MOCA-Peds pilot in 2017.

METHODS

We conducted quantitative and qualitative analyses with 5081 eligible pediatricians who registered to participate in the 2017 pilot; 81.4% (n = 4016) completed a quarter 4 survey and/or end-of-year survey (January 2018) and comprise the analytic sample.

RESULTS

The majority of pediatricians considered the MOCA-Peds to be feasible and acceptable as an alternative to the proctored MOC GP examination. More than 90% of respondents indicated they would participate in the proposed MOCA-Peds model instead of the examination. Participants also offered recommendations to improve the MOCA-Peds (eg, enhanced focus of questions on outpatient GP, references provided before taking questions); the ABP is carefully considering these as the MOCA-Peds is further refined.

CONCLUSIONS

Pilot participant feedback in 2017 suggested that the MOCA-Peds could be implemented for GP starting in January 2019, with all 15 subspecialties launched by 2022. Current and future evaluations will continue to explore feasibility, acceptability, and learning and practice change as well as sustainability of participation.

Pediatrician Perspectives on Learning and Practice Change in the MOCA-Peds 2017 Pilot

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

This article is the second of a 2-part series examining results regarding self-reported learning and practice change from the American Board of Pediatrics 2017 pilot of an alternative to the proctored, continuing certification examination, termed the Maintenance of Certification Assessment for Pediatrics (MOCA-Peds). Because of its design, MOCA-Peds has several learning advantages compared with the proctored examination.

METHODS

Quantitative and qualitative analyses with 5081 eligible pediatricians who registered to participate in the 2017 pilot; 81.4% (n = 4016) completed a quarter 4 survey and/or the end-of-year survey (January 2018) and compose the analytic sample.

RESULTS

Nearly all (97.6%) participating pediatricians said they had learned, refreshed, or enhanced their medical knowledge, and of those, 62.0% had made a practice change related to pilot participation. Differences were noted on the basis of subspecialty status, with 68.9% of general pediatricians having made a practice change compared with 41.4% of subspecialists. Within the 1456 open-ended responses about participants' most significant practice change, responses ranged widely, including both medical care content (eg, "care for corneal abrasions altered," "better inform patients about. . .flu vaccine") and nonspecific content (eg, providing better patient education, using evidence-based medicine, increased use of resources in regular practice).

CONCLUSIONS

As a proctored examination alternative, MOCA-Peds positively influenced self-reported learning and practice change. In future evaluation of MOCA-Peds and other medical longitudinal assessments, researchers should study ways to further encourage learning and practice change and sustainability.

Envisioning a True Continuum of Competency-Based Medical Education, Training, and Practice

The existing structure of physician education has developed in siloed stages, with consecutive degrees and certifications and progressively longer training programs. As further fragmentation of health care and training systems will not improve the quality of care and education, the authors argue that a new vision of education, training, and practice as a continuum is needed.They advocate for a model of competency-based medical education that merges with competency-based medical practice. In this system, education and training will result in individual, dynamic portfolios of valid entrustable professional activities (EPAs) for which physicians are certified. Physicians can maintain and renew that entrustment as long as the EPAs remain within their scope of practice. Entrustment occurs initially during training but is then granted for new activities as physicians' careers evolve.This model accounts for the need to keep pace with changes in population health needs and expectations of competence over time. It de-emphasizes the divides between the stages of training and views the continuum from undergraduate medical education until retirement as a whole. Key obligations of self-regulating medical professionals include both the reception and the provision of supervision from and for others, respectively. Learning must be embedded in practice to address expectations regarding new knowledge and skills as they evolve with scientific and technological advances.Entrusting physicians to deliver effective and safe care, based on their performance of the requisite EPAs without supervision, should ensure that they provide high-value, quality care to patients.