Search

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.

Phenomenon: Internal medicine physicians in the United States must pass the American Board of Internal Medicine Internal Medicine Maintenance of Certification (ABIM IM-MOC) examination as part of t...

American Boards of Medical Specialties have emphasized single point in time testing for summative assessment of cognitive expertise necessary for board certification. In 2016, the American Board of Anesthesiology introduced Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology (MOCA), a longitudinal assessment platform that provides diplomates formative feedback with continuous questions over time and adapts questions to areas of knowledge weaknesses over time. This paper describes the rationale, history, and early results of the American Board of Anesthesiology MOCA platform.

BackgroundIn many healthcare systems, physicians are accustomed to periodically participate in individual performance appraisals to guide their professional development. For the purpose of revalidation, or maintenance of certification, they need to demonstrate that they have engaged with the outcomes of these appraisals. The combination of taking ownership in professional development and meeting accountability requirements may cause undesirable interference of purposes. To support physicians in their professional development, new Dutch legislation requires that they discuss their performance data with a non-hierarchical (peer)coach and draft a personal development plan. In this study, we report on the design of this system for performance appraisal in a Dutch academic medical center.MethodsUsing a design-based research approach, a hospital-based research group had the lead in drafting and implementing a performance appraisal protocol, selecting a multisource feedback tool, co-developing and piloting a coaching approach, implementing a planning tool, recruiting peer coaches and facilitating their training and peer group debriefings.ResultsThe system consisted of a two-hour peer-to-peer conversation based on the principles of appreciative inquiry and solution-focused coaching. Sessions were rated as highly motivating, development-oriented, concrete and valuable. Peer coaches were considered suitable, although occasionally physicians preferred a professional coach because of their expertise. The system honored both accountability and professional development purposes. By integrating the performance appraisal system with an already existing internal performance system, physicians were enabled to openly and safely discuss their professional development with a peer, while also being supported by their superior in their self-defined developmental goals. Although the peer-to-peer conversation was mandatory and participation in the process was documented, it was up to the physician whether or not to share its results with others, including their superior.ConclusionsIn the context of mandatory revalidation, professional development can be supported when the appraisal process involves three characteristics: the appraisal process is appreciative and explores developmental opportunities; coaches are trustworthy and skilled; and the physician has control over the disclosure of the appraisal output. Although the peer-to-peer conversations were positively evaluated, the effects on physicians’ professional development have yet to be investigated in longitudinal research designs.

BACKGROUND Older patients are often prescribed potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) given their age. We measured the association between a physician's general knowledge and their PIM prescribing. METHODS Using a 2013-2017 cross-sectional design, we related a general internist's knowledge (n = 8196) to their prescribing of PIMs to fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries, age ≥ 66 years with part D coverage, which they saw in the outpatient setting the year after their exam (n = 875,132). Physician knowledge was based on the American Board of Internal Medicine's (ABIM) Internal Medicine Maintenance of Certification (IM-MOC) exam scores. Medications included 72 PIMs from the American Geriatric Society's Beers Criteria and appropriate alternatives to these medications. Logistic regressions controlled for physicians practice/training characteristics and patient-risk factors. RESULTS Annually, 11.0% of patients received a PIM and 57.2% received an appropriate alternative medication. Patients seen by physicians scoring in the top versus bottom quartile were 8.6% less likely (95% confidence interval [CI]: -12.7 to -4.5, p

Continuing medical education is an ongoing process to educate clinicians and provide patients with up-to-date, evidence-based care. Since its inception, the maintenance of certification (MOC) program has changed dramatically. This article reviews the development of MOC and its integration with the 6 core competencies, including the practice-based learning and improvement cycle. The concept of lifelong learning is discussed, with specific focus on different methods for surgeons to engage in learning, including simulation, coaching, and communities of practice. In addition, the future of MOC in continuous professional development is reviewed.

Background Historically, individual doctors were responsible for maintaining their own professional competence. More recently, changing patient expectations, debate about the appropriateness of professional self-regulation, and high-profile cases of malpractice have led to a move towards formal regulation of professional competence (RPC). Such programmes require doctors to demonstrate that they are fit to practice, through a variety of means. Participation in RPC is now part of many doctors’ professional lives, yet it remains a highly contested area. Cost, limited evidence of impact, and lack of relevance to practice are amongst the criticisms cited. Doctors’ attitudes towards RPC, their beliefs about its objectives and effectiveness, and their experiences of trying to meet its requirements can impact engagement with the process. We aim to conduct a scoping review to map the empirical literature in this area, to summarise the key findings, and to identify gaps for future research. Methods We will conduct our review following the six phases outlined by Arksey and O’Malley, and Levac. We will search seven electronic databases: Academic Search Complete, Business Source Complete, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, Social Sciences Full Text, and SocINDEX for relevant publications, and the websites of medical regulatory and educational organisations for documents. We will undertake backward and forward citation tracking of selected studies and will consult with international experts regarding key publications. Two researchers will independently screen papers for inclusion and extract data using a piloted data extraction tool. Data will be collated to provide a descriptive summary of the literature. A thematic analysis of the key findings will be presented as a narrative summary of the literature. Discussion We believe that this review will be of value to those tasked with the design and implementation of RPC programmes, helping them to maximise doctors’ commitment and engagement, and to researchers, pointing to areas that would benefit from further enquiry. This research is timely; internationally existing programmes are evolving, new programmes are being initiated, and many jurisdictions do not yet have programmes in place. There is an opportunity for learning across different programmes and from the experiences of established programmes. Our review will support that learning. Systematic review registration PROSPERO does not register scoping reviews. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13643-019-1132-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objectives Hematopathology (HP) is a rapidly changing field with insufficient data to provide guidance to program directors (PDs), the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, or the American Board of Pathology. Methods Two surveys were performed—one for HP PDs and one, given twice, for HP diplomates doing Maintenance of Certification/Continuing Certification reporting in 2017 to 2018. Results Bone marrow (BM), lymph node (LN), and flow cytometry interpretations and peripheral blood/fluid reviews are performed by more than 80% of hematopathologists and are the areas with the greatest amount of training. A smaller proportion of hematopathologists is involved in other HP-related activities. Most PDs believed fellows should perform BM procedures. Interpretation of 400 or more LNs and 500 BMs was PDs’ median expectations for fellows. PDs and HP diplomates considered coagulation and benign RBC disorders overemphasized on the certification examination. Conclusions These results highlight how varied the practice of HP is and can provide guidance to HP PDs, those responsible for assessing HP programs, and the American Board of Pathology.

BACKGROUND: A key component of Maintenance of Certification (MOC) for family and internal medicine physicians is the requirement to pass a periodic examination of medical knowledge. Little is known about the effects of preparing for MOC exams on knowledge and practice. OBJECTIVE: To understand how MOC exam preparation can affect knowledge and practice. DESIGN: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews, 45–60 min each, conducted by telephone at participants’ convenience. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 80 primary care physicians from the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) and the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) who had recently taken an MOC exam; the sample purposefully selected to represent diversity of experiences with MOC exams and range of opinions about MOC, as well as diversity of participant backgrounds—gender, practice type, etc. APPROACH: Close analysis of physicians’ accounts of what they learned when preparing for an MOC exam and how this knowledge affected their practice. RESULTS: Sixty-seven of 80 physicians stated they gained knowledge relevant to their practice. Sixty-three gave concrete examples of how this affected their practice, including direct changes to patient care (e.g., improved diagnosis or prescribing and reduced unnecessary testing) or less direct changes (e.g., improved ability to co-manage with other providers or communicate with patients). Physicians also described sharing what they learned with others, including peers and trainees. LIMITATIONS: Interviews could have been affected by recall and/or social desirability bias, as well as researchers’ role as board staff. Although we followed a recruitment protocol designed to mitigate recruitment acceptance bias, our findings may not be generalizable to wider groups of physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Most physicians from two primary care specialties interviewed reported ways in which studying for an MOC exam resulted in acquiring knowledge that was both relevant and beneficial to their patient care. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11606-019-05118-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

In 2016, the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) and the National Patient Safety Foundation issued a joint call encouraging each ABMS member board to integrate patient safety principles and activities into their initial and continuous certification processes. This article describes how the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology integrates various aspects of patient safety principles into its initial and continuous certification processes. The authors first describe how they assess patient safety within their initial certification processes. They then describe each component of their maintenance of certification program, and how they intentionally embed patient safety principles within each component.

OBJECTIVE There continues to be a debate about the value and purpose of maintenance of certification (MOC) programs in the US. The goal of this study is to assess the impact, value, and purpose of MOC programs in rheumatology. METHODS A survey was sent to 3,107 rheumatologists in the US. The survey addressed how rheumatologists perceive the value and impact of MOC programs on rheumatology practice and patient care. RESULTS A total of 515 rheumatologists completed this survey. The majority (74.8%) believed there was no significant value in MOC, beyond what is already achieved from continuing medical education. Most rheumatologists did not believe MOC was valuable in improving patient care (63.5%), and the majority felt that the primary reason for creating MOC was either the financial well-being of board-certifying organizations (43.4%) or to satisfy administrative requirements in health systems (30%). Although 65.6% perceived that staying current with new medical knowledge was a positive impact of MOC programs, the MOC was perceived to result in time away from providing patient care (74.6%) and time away from family (74%). When asked about potential effects of requiring MOC, 77.7% reported physician burnout, 67.4% early physician retirement, and 63.9% anticipated an effect on reducing the overall number of practicing rheumatologists. CONCLUSION The majority of rheumatologists do not believe there is significant value for MOC programs. There is evidence for lack of trust in board-certifying organizations, and rheumatologists believe MOC programs contribute to physician burnout, early retirement, and loss in the rheumatology workforce.

Introduction: Maintenance of Certification (MOC) was implemented to help physicians remain current with evolving medical standards, but has been criticized for being irrelevant to practice. We assessed family physicians9 (FPs9) opinions about the content of American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) self-assessment modules (SAMs). Methods: We used ABFM administrative data from feedback surveys completed after each of the 16 SAMs from 2006 to 2016. FPs rated agreement with 2 statements—1) “Content is appropriate for my practice,” and 2) “Content was presented at an appropriate level”—on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). We calculated mean ratings of each statement by year and stratified by Knowledge Assessment (KA) and Clinical Simulation (CS) portions of the SAM. We plotted mean ratings by FPs9 age at their first SAM completion and the total number of SAMs completed. Results: SAMs were completed (n = 633,198) from 2006 to 2016 with 448,408 (71%) feedback surveys completed. The annual mean ratings of both statements varied little (less than 0.5) and were above 4.5 for all SAMs. CS ratings were consistently lower than KA ratings. FPs of all ages at first SAM provided similar ratings and agreement with content appropriateness increased with repeated exposure to SAMs. Conclusion: Over 11 years, the content of ABFM SAMs was regarded by FPs as appropriate for practice and presented at an appropriate level. Continued monitoring of feedback is necessary to keep the content of MOC programs relevant for physicians9 practice.

PURPOSE To summarize the findings of studies, conducted by individuals both internal and external to the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) Member Boards, of the associations of Maintenance of Certification (MOC) and improvements in physicians' knowledge and patient care processes or outcomes. METHOD The authors conducted a narrative review of studies identified by searching PubMed and Web of Science for English-language articles from the United States published between 2000 and May 2017. To be included, articles had to examine the relationship of MOC to physician knowledge, clinical practice processes, or patient care outcomes. The initial search yielded 811 articles. After two rounds of review and excluding those articles that did not fit the study criteria, 39 articles were included for analysis. RESULTS The 39 included studies were conducted by or included diplomates of 12 ABMS Member Boards. Twenty-two studies examined MOC processes that were developed by an ABMS Board; 17 examined interventions that were developed by nonboard entities but accepted for MOC credit by an ABMS Board. Thirty-eight studies examined a single component of MOC; 24 studied the improvement in medical practice component. Thirty-seven studies reported at least one positive outcome. CONCLUSIONS Most of the studies included in this review highlighted circumstances in which MOC was associated with positive impacts on physician knowledge and patient care processes or outcomes. Future collaborative research is needed to improve the relevance, helpfulness, and generalizability of continuing certification to different physicians across specialties and practice settings.

Starting in 2022, the American Board of Pediatrics will launch the Maintenance of Certification Assessment for Pediatrics: Pediatric Emergency Medicine (MOCA-Peds: PEM) longitudinal assessment, which will provide an at-home alternative to the point-in-time examination. This longitudinal assessment will help engage PEM physicians participating in continuing certification in a more flexible and continuous lifelong, self-directed learning process while still providing a summative assessment of their knowledge. This commentary provides background information on MOCA-Peds and an introduction to MOCA-Peds: PEM and how it gives the PEM physician another option to participate in continuing certification.

To develop and evaluate a post-acute care simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) continuing medical education (CME)/maintenance of certification (MOC) procedure course.Pretest-posttest study of the SBML intervention.A 2-day post-acute care procedures course.Sixteen practicing clinicians (5 physicians,11 advanced practice providers). Participants engaged in a skills pretest on knee aspiration/injection, gastrostomy tube removal/replacement, tracheostomy tube exchange, and basic suturing using a checklist created for each procedure. Participants received a didactic on each procedure followed by deliberate practice with feedback. Using the same checklists, participants completed a skills posttest and were required to meet a minimum passing standard (MPS) to obtain CME/MOC credit.The MPS for each skills checklist was determined by a multidisciplinary panel of 11 experts. Participants completed surveys on procedure self-confidence and a course evaluation.There was statistically significant improvement between pre- and posttests for all four procedures (An SBML training course granting CME/MOC credit for post-acute care providers significantly improves performance of knee aspiration/injection, gastrostomy tube removal/replacement, tracheostomy tube exchange, and basic suturing.

The future of the American Board of Internal Medicine Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program is at a crossroads. The current MOC program lacks a clear visible mission, adds to modern health care’s onerous bureaucracy, and thus pulls physicians from the most important humanistic aspects of their profession. The aim of the MOC program should be to promote the best patient care by ensuring certified physicians maintain core skills through continuous education and evaluation. The program should focus on education and be designed with the rigorous obligations of practicing physicians in mind. Moving forward, the American Board of Internal Medicine should cocreate MOC with the physician community and apply innovative adult education techniques. Over time, data-driven methods and member feedback should be used to provide continuous program improvement. This review describes the origins of the current state of MOC, explores its evidence base, provides examples of model programs for the maintenance of complex professional skills, and outlines guiding principles for the future of MOC.

Context.— Certification by the American Board of Pathology (ABPath) is a valued credential that serves patients, families, and the public and improves patient care. The ABPath establishes professional and educational standards and assesses the knowledge of candidates for initial certification in pathology. Diplomates certified in 2006 and thereafter are required to participate in Continuing Certification (CC; formerly Maintenance of Certification) in order to maintain certification. Objective.— To inform and update the pathology community on the history of board certification, the requirements for CC, ABPath CertLink, changes to the CC program, and ABPath compliance with recommendations from the American Board of Medical Specialties Vision Commission; and to demonstrate the value of CC participation for diplomates with non–time-limited certification. Data Sources.— This review uses ABPath archived minutes of the CC Committee and the Board of Trustees, the ABPath CC Booklet of Information, the collective knowledge of the ABPath staff and trustees, and the American Board of Medical Specialties 2018–2019 Board Certification Report. Conclusions.— The ABPath continues to update the CC program to make it more relevant and meaningful and less burdensome for diplomates. Adding ABPath CertLink to the program has been a significant enhancement for the assessment of medical knowledge and has been well received by diplomates.

Americans expect their doctors to have the competence to deliver high-quality care and expect safeguards to be in place that assure their doctors are competent. However, competence requires knowledge, and people have trouble assessing their own knowledge and level of competence. Because external assessment is required, several organizations have taken on the roles of defining and assuring medical competence. For example, professional organizations such as the American College of Cardiology (ACC) have developed consensus documents that define core competencies for cardiologists. External organizations such as the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) have defined training requirements for cardiologists, and the ABIM has developed a process to certify that physicians maintain their competence, although the process has generated considerable criticism from the profession. Recently, the ACC and ABIM have worked together to make the certification process less onerous and more meaningful. This paper provides a brief summary of the history and ongoing efforts to assure the competence of cardiologists.

Introduction Even physicians who routinely work in complex, dynamic practices may be unprepared to optimally manage challenging critical events. High-fidelity simulation can realistically mimic critical clinically relevant events, however the reliability and validity of simulation-based assessment scores for practicing physicians has not been established. Methods Standardised complex simulation scenarios were developed and administered to board-certified, practicing anesthesiologists who volunteered to participate in an assessment study during formative maintenance of certification activities. A subset of the study population agreed to participate as the primary responder in a second scenario for this study. The physicians were assessed independently by trained raters on both teamwork/behavioural and technical performance measures. Analysis using Generalisability and Decision studies were completed for the two scenarios with two raters. Results The behavioural score was not more reliable than the technical score. With two raters > 20 scenarios would be required to achieve a reliability estimate of 0.7. Increasing the number of raters for a given scenario would have little effect on reliability. Conclusions The performance of practicing physicians on simulated critical events may be highly context-specific. Realistic simulation-based assessment for practicing physicians is resource-intensive and may be best-suited for individualized formative feedback. More importantly, aggregate data from a population of participants may have an even higher impact if used to identify skill or knowledge gaps to be addressed by training programs and inform continuing education improvements across the profession.

In February 2019, the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) released the final report of the Continuing Board Certification: Vision for the Future initiative, issuing strong recommendations to replace ineffective, traditional mechanisms for physicians' maintenance of certification with meaningful strategies that strengthen professional self-regulation and simultaneously engender public trust. The Vision report charges ABMS Member Boards, including the American Board of Surgery (ABS), to develop and implement a more formative, less summative approach to continuing certification. To realize the ABMS's Vision in surgery, new programs must support the assessment of surgeons' performance in practice, identification of individualized performance gaps, tailored goals to address those gaps, and execution of personalized action plans with accountability and longitudinal support. Peer surgical coaching, especially when paired with video-based assessment, provides a structured approach that can meet this need. Surgical coaching was one of the approaches to continuing professional development that was discussed at an ABS-sponsored retreat in January 2020; this commentary review provides an overview of that discussion. The professional surgical societies, in partnership with the ABS, are uniquely positioned to implement surgical coaching programs to support the continuing certification of their membership. In this article, we provide historical context for board certification in surgery, interpret how the ABMS's Vision applies to surgical performance, and highlight recent developments in video-based assessment and peer surgical coaching. We propose surgical coaching as a foundational strategy for accomplishing the ABMS's Vision for continuing board certification in surgery.

This cohort study examines the association between health care intensity in the region where physicians practice and their ability to practice high-value care, specifically for physicians who relocated after residency., Key Points Question How does the health care environment in a region influence internists’ clinical capabilities, particularly the ability to practice high-value care? Findings This cohort study of 2714 newly certified internists (in 2002) who relocated to a new region after completing residency found that higher intensity of use of health care services in a physician’s destination region was associated with reduced ability to practice appropriately conservative care 1 decade later compared with that ability measured at the end of residency. Meaning The demands of practicing in high-intensity service regions may erode internists’ ability to practice high-value, conservative care., Importance Use of health care services and physician practice patterns have been shown to vary widely across the United States. Although practice patterns—in particular, physicians’ ability to provide high-quality, high-value care—develop during training, the association of a physician’s regional practice environment with that ability is less well understood. Objective To examine the association between health care intensity in the region where physicians practice and their ability to practice high-value care, specifically for physicians whose practice environment changed due to relocation after residency. Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study included a national sample of 3896 internal medicine physicians who took the 2002 American Board of Internal Medicine initial certification examination followed approximately 1 decade (April 21, 2011, to May 7, 2015) later by the Maintenance of Certification (MOC) examination. At the time of the MOC examination, 2714 of these internists were practicing in a new region. Data were analyzed from March 6, 2016, to May 21, 2018. Exposures Intensity of care in the Dartmouth Atlas hospital referral region (HRR), measured by per-enrollee end-of-life physician visits (primary) and current practice type (secondary). Main Outcomes and Measures The outcome, a physician’s ability to practice high-value care, was assessed using the Appropriately Conservative Management (ACM) score on the MOC examination, measuring performance across all questions for which the correct answer was the most conservative option. The exposure, regional health care intensity, was measured as per-enrollee end-of-life physician visits in the Dartmouth Atlas HRR of the physician’s practice. Results Among the 3860 participating internists included in the analysis (2030 men [52.6%]; mean [SD] age, 45.6 [4.5] years), those who moved to regions in the quintile of highest health care intensity had an ACM score 0.22 SD lower (95% CI, −0.32 to −0.12) than internists who moved to regions in the quintile of lowest intensity, controlling for postresidency ACM scores. This difference reflected scoring in the 44th compared with the 53rd percentile of all examinees. This association was mildly attenuated (0.18 SD less; 95% CI, −0.28 to −0.09) after adjustment for physician and practice characteristics. Conclusions and Relevance This study found that practice patterns of internists who relocate after residency training appear to migrate toward norms of the new region. The demands of practicing in high-intensity regions may erode the ability to practice high-value conservative care.

Background: Little is known about how physicians experience preparing for board recertification examinations. As women make up a growing proportion of the primary care physician workforce, we aimed to explore how primary care physicians experience the personal and professional impacts of recertification examination preparation activities, and whether these impacts differ by gender. Materials and Methods: We conducted exploratory qualitative semistructured interviews with 80 primary care physicians, who had recently taken either the American Board of Family Medicine or American Board of Internal Medicine recertification examination and who practice outpatient care. We used an iterative recruitment approach to obtain a representative sample. We applied a team-based constant comparative analytic approach to identify and categorize themes related to how preparing for the recertification examination impacted their personal or professional lives, and then compared these themes by physician gender. Results: We interviewed 41 male and 39 female participants. Physicians most frequently described taking time from personal rather than professional activities to study, but often said this was "no big deal." Physicians described impacts on personal life such as missing out on family or leisure time, conflicts with parenting responsibilities, and an increased reliance on their spouse for domestic and childcare duties. Female physicians more frequently described parenting and leisure time impacts than males did. Conclusions: Recertification examination preparation impacts physicians' personal lives in a variety of ways and are sometimes experienced differently along gendered lines. These findings suggest opportunities for employers, payers, and specialty boards to help physicians ease potential burdens related to maintaining board certification.

Background and Objectives: The American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) is the first medical specialty board to require all residents participate in the maintenance of certification (MOC) process prior to sitting for board certification. This study used surveys and focus groups of family medicine residents in four university-affiliated residency programs to explore participants’ perceived benefits and barriers to common methods of completing the performance improvement in practice (Part IV) MOC requirement, and the perceived impact on practice. Methods: Residents independently selected into one of three ABFM-approved methods of meeting the Part IV requirement. Following completion of the activity, participants completed a survey and then participated in a focus group. Results: Residents cited time constraints as a major barrier to all Part IV methods. They also reported lack of relevance to practice, deficiencies in performance improvement skills, and access to clinical data. Ease of use was a benefit of online modules, but residents did not perceive them as relevant to practice or leading practice change. Portfolio and self-directed activities were perceived as most relevant to practice and improved patient care, and involved more team-based experiences. Most participants would not participate in Part IV if not required. Conclusions: Group quality improvement projects through the portfolio-approved and self-directed activities seemed to be the most positively reported way to complete the ABFM requirement. Regardless of method, time constraints and quality improvement expertise are significant barriers to completion of the requirement. Residency programs will need to grapple with these barriers to maximize benefits to residents as they prepare to become board certified.