Performance of Pediatric Rehabilitation Medicine Candidates on the Subspecialty Board Certification Examination from 2003 to 2015

Background

Pediatric rehabilitation medicine (PRM) physicians enter the field via several pathways. It is unknown whether different training pathways impact performance on the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (ABPMR) PRM Examination and Maintenance of Certification (MOC) Examination.

Objectives

To describe the examination performance of candidates on the ABPMR PRM Examination according to their type of training (physiatrists with a clinical PRM focus, accredited or unaccredited fellowship training, separate pediatric and physical medicine and rehabilitation residencies, or combined pediatrics/physical medicine and rehabilitation residencies) and to compare candidates’ performance on the PRM Examination with their initial ABPMR certification and MOC Examinations.

Design

A retrospective cohort study.

Setting

American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation office.

Participants

A total of 250 candidates taking the PRM subspecialty certification examination from 2003 to 2015.

Methods

Scaled scores on the PRM Examination were compared to the examinees’ initial certification scores as well as their admissibility criteria. Pass rates and scaled scores also were compared for those taking their initial PRM certification versus MOC.

Main Outcome Measurements

Board pass rates and mean scaled scores for initial PRM Examination and MOC.

Results

The 250 physiatrists who took the subspecialty PRM Examination had an overall first-time pass rate of 89%. There was no significant difference between first-time PRM pass rates or mean scaled scores for individuals who completed an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education–accredited fellowship versus those who did not. First time PRM pass rates were greatest among those who were also certified by the American Board of Pediatrics (100%). Performance on Parts I and II of the initial ABPMR Certification Examination significantly predicted PRM Examination scores. There was no difference in mean scaled scores for initial PRM certification versus taking the PRM Examination for MOC.

Conclusions

Several pathways to admissibility to the PRM Examination afforded similar opportunity for diplomates to gain the knowledge necessary to pass the PRM Examination. Once certified, physicians taking the PRM Examination for MOC have a high success rate of passing again in years 7-10 of their certification cycle.

Level of Evidence

III