Credentialed Persons, Credentialed Knowledge

The vast experimental literature on human error agrees with history of medicine, folklore, and superstition In discrediting knowledge claims based solely on anecdotal impressions. Since clinical experience consists of anecdotal impressions by practitioners, tt Is unavoidably a mixture of truths, half-truths, and falsehoods. The scientific method is the only known way to distinguish these, and it is both unscholariy and unethical for psychologists who deal with other persons' health, careers, money, freedom, and even life itself to pretend that clinical experience suffices and that quantitative research on diagnostic and therapeutic procedures is not needed. Disputes about philosophy of science (e.g., logical positivism) are irrelevant to this issue, which is simply one of distinguishing knowledge claims that bring reliable credentials and others that do not.     

Industrial hygienist as a clinical consultant

The roles of industrial hygienists outside the traditional industrial setting have been expanding. This paper discusses the industrial hygienist's direct and active involvement with patients in the clinic setting. The types of roles played by the industrial hygienists in an occupational health clinic are categorized based upon experience in one academic clinic. Although experience demonstrated that there is an important function for the industrial hygienist as a clinical consultant, unresolved issues, ranging from payment to staff privileging, interfere with widespread participation.     

军队护理专业高级技术职务任职标准的调查分析

目的比较不同职称护理专家对军队高级技术职务任职标准的观点差异。方法通过德尔菲法组织两轮专家函询,比较不同职称护理专家赋予各指标权重的差异。结果不同职称的护理专家对一级指标的看法基本一致,认为最重要的是护理工作和专业知识(Kendall协和系数W=0.993,p=0.077),对二级指标教学工作、科研工作、三级指标教学成果的看法基本一致(W均=1,p=0.135)。对二级指标思想品德、专业知识、护理工作及三级指标护理质量的看法不一致(W=0.75,p=0.223;W=0.7,p=0.231;W=0.75,p=0.223;W=0.6,p=0.308)。结论对于军队护理专业高级技术职务任职标准,不同职称专家的看法有差异,正确分析专家的不同意见,建立科学可行的军队护理专业高级技术职务任职标准,是有效做好职称评审工作的基础。     

军队护理专业高级技术职务任职标准的研究

目的探索并建立科学合理的军队护理专业高级技术职务任职标准。方法通过文献回顾、小型专家会议初步拟制军队护理专业高级技术职务任职标准体系,采用德尔菲法组织两轮专家咨询,汇总专家意见,确定指标命名、权重及每次指标的最低标准说明等。结果分别针对总医院和中心医院建立了由思想品德、专业知识、护理工作、教学工作、科研工作、其他社会工作等6项一级指标和17项二级指标、13项三级指标(中心医院12项)构成的两个护理专业高级技术职务任职体系。结论建立的护理专业高级技术职务任职标准具有针对性、操作性强等特点,有一定的实用价值。     

医疗器械证件档案的动态管理

医疗器械证件管理是医疗器械质量管理工作的重要内容之一。本文阐述了医疗器械证件档案管理的基本概念，着重介绍了本人在多年实践工作中逐步积累的从事医疗器械证件档案动态管理的方法和体会。     

不同职称人员对军队药剂专业高级技术职务任职标准的观点比较

目的 比较中高级职称药剂人员对军队药剂专业高级技术职务任职标准的看法.方法 通过德尔菲法组织两轮专家函询,比较不同职称者最终赋予各指标权重的差异.结果 不同职称者对一级指标的看法基本一致,认为最重要的是药剂工作、专业知识(Kendall协和系数W=0.906,P=0.107),对二级指标专业知识、药剂工作、教学工作的意见基本一致(W=1,P=0.092;W=1,P=0.157;W=1,P=0.135).对二级指标思想品德、科研工作、三级指标药剂工作数量、药剂工作质量、教学成果的看法不一致(W =0.75,P=0.223;W=0.75,P=0.223;W=0.75,P=0.223;W=0.1,P=0.896;W=0,P=1).结论 不同职称人员的看法有偏差,尤其是在药剂工作质量和教学成果的考量方面,中级职称者更看重短期指标如文章等;高级职称者更看重长期积累指标如教学奖励等.要进一步深入分析专家的不同意见,建立科学的军队药剂专业高级技术职务任职标准.     

关于建立我国图书馆职业资格认证制度的几点建议

实施图书馆职业资格认证制度是社会发展的需要和图书馆现代化建设的需要。现从我国图书馆职业资格认证制度的发展现状入手,分析我国建立职业资格认证制度所面临的主要问题,并对我国实施图书馆职业资格证的几个具体问题阐述个人的观点。     

Privileging and credentialing for interventional cardiology procedures

Local institutional‐specific credentialing and privileging for procedures is an important process for ensuring the quality of care provided by interventional cardiologists. Recently revised standards for coronary intervention and the blossoming of structural heart disease programs have generated controversy over these processes. How standards are set for credentialing and privileging is poorly understood by most interventional cardiologists, including those responsible for credentialing and privileging. Requirements from The Joint Commission dictate how credentialing and privileging is performed at hospitals they accredit. Physicians must be recredentialed every 2 years at each hospital, with privileges renewed at that time. Hospitals must review quality of physicians even more frequently using Ongoing Professional Practice Evaluations. Hospitals must also evaluate the performance of physicians when they join a hospital staff or when they begin performing new procedures using Focused Professional Practice Evaluations. Cardiology department directors and catheterization laboratory directors are responsible for recredentialing and reprivileging members of their departments. Individual physicians are responsible for cooperating with these processes, and for periodic recertification with specialty boards and governmental agencies. We provide specific guidance to help physicians navigate these processes. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.