PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16735880

Subspecialty certification in hand surgery.

Abstract

Subspecialty certification in hand surgery was instituted in 1989 by the collaborative efforts of the American Boards of General Surgery, Plastic Surgery, and Orthopaedic Surgery. Candidates must be certified by their parent board and have demonstrated qualifications in hand surgery beyond those expected of other Board-certified surgeons. Qualifications include 1 year of additional training in an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education accredited hand surgery fellowship, successful passage of a secure examination in hand surgery, and a practice characterized by a majority of cases in hand surgery. The certificates are time limited, and every 10 years one must successfully pass a recertification examination to maintain subspecialty certification. Since its inception, 1431 orthopaedic surgeons have passed the examination and the failure rate has been 3.1%. Six hundred and twenty-three have recertified with a failure rate of 2%. Possession of a certificate of subspecialty qualifications in hand surgery was never intended to bestow special privileges to those who practice hand surgery; rather, it was intended to demonstrate to the public and our profession that certificate holders have met Board Standards and are qualified to treat problems related to the hand and wrist.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Peter J Stern. 2006. Subspecialty certification in hand surgery.. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.blo.0000224041.77215.b6

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Assessing the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system: digital vs plaster dental casts.

INTRODUCTION: The purposes of this study were to determine whether the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system (ABO OGS) can be assessed accurately from digital dental casts and whether there are statistical differences between digital and plaster dental casts in scoring the ABO OGS. METHODS: Thirty posttreatment plaster dental casts were selected and scanned by OrthoCAD (Cadent, Carlstadt, NJ) to produce 30 corresponding digital dental casts. The plaster and digital casts were compared by using the criteria of the ABO OGS. Because the data were ordinal, a nonparametic statistical analysis was used. RESULTS: The Wilcoxon test for paired samples showed significant differences between the plaster and digital casts for occlusal contacts, occlusal relationships, and total scores (P <.05). No significant differences were found for alignment, marginal ridges, overjet, and interproximal contacts. Buccolingual inclination was not included in this study because of inability to perform proper measurements with the OrthoCAD program. Mean differences of points deducted ranged from .03 point for marginal ridges to 5.07 points for the total score. The variable with the most points deducted related to occlusal relationships, and the fewest points were deducted for interproximal contacts. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, the current OrthoCAD program (version 2.2) was not adequate for scoring all parameters as required by the ABO OGS.

Certification↗