In November 2018, ICE, the Right to SAFE Care Coalition and the Citizen Advocacy Center hosted the International Summit on Continuing Competence. At this Summit, noted researchers and industry leaders presented research and literature supporting various approaches to the assessment and demonstration of continuing competence and reviewed novel approaches to recertification/revalidation being undertaken both in the US and abroad.
Access the written proceedings of the summit, plus recordings of individual presentation (descriptions provided below).
Member Price: $315; Non-member Price: $340
If you receive ICE emails, you already have an account. Click 'Login to view purchase options' to login or retrieve your password using the "Username and/or Password Help" link at the bottom of the page.
It is important to ICE that you enjoy this offering. Please email ICE staff at firstname.lastname@example.org and identify any needs and accommodations requested.
2018 International Summit on Continuing Competence
Balancing Multiple Perspectives in Continuing Competence
Various stakeholders: the public, regulators, certifying bodies, practitioners, and others have similar and competing perspectives: All want access to affordable quality care. How can we protect the public by ensuring our practitioners are up-to-date, while avoiding regulations that are too costly, burdensome or lack relevance for the practitioner?
- The Public: Rich Waters, MBA, CAE, American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS)
- Regulators and Credentialing Bodies: Zeno W. St. Cyr, II, MPH, Public Member on Licensing Boards, Certifying Bodies
- Practitioners/Other Stakeholders: Christopher Colenda, MD, MPH, Co-Chair, Continuing Board Certification: Vision for the Future Commission - What are they up to?
Research on Continuing Competence and Credentialing
Research into the value of continuing competence has been challenging. How is the value of certification supported by the literature? Where is current research and experimentation taking us?
- Review of Research: Rebecca S. Lipner, PhD, American Board of Internal Medicine
- Research and Development of New Approaches: Brian Clauser, EdD, National Board of Medical Examiners
Using Assessment to Target Professional Development for the Individual
Several recertification programs are based on an initial assessment to determine where to focus certificants’ knowledge and skills development. What research supports this approach and how has it been received by certificants?
- Fran Byrd, RN, NNP-BC, MPH, National Certification Corporation
- Cynthia Miller Murphy, RN MSN, CAE, FAAN, Oncology Nursing Certification Corporation
- Karen Plaus, PhD, CRNA, FAAN, CAE, National Board of Certification and Recertification for Nurse Anesthetists
Reflective Practice /Competencies/Learning Plan Approaches /Portfolios
Certifying bodies in various countries have taken different approaches to support continuing competence – some based on practice competencies, some based on learning plans that target professional development, others using reflective practice or computer-generated learning plans. What are the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches?
- Clinical Hours, Portfolio, and Learning Plans: Deb Elias, RN, College of Registered Nurses of Manitoba
- Automation in Learning Plans: Christine Reidy, RD, Commission on Dietetic Registration
- Practice Reflection, and Competences in Recertification: Leanne Worsfold, iComp Consulting
Using Technology to Keep Practitioners Current
New hybrid approaches, such as longitudinal assessment, combine assessment and learning. What research supports these approaches and how are the pilots or new programs working?
- Longitudinal Assessment in Maintenance of Certification (MOC): Andrew Callahan Dwyer, PhD, American Board of Pediatrics
- New advances in longitudinal self-assessment and other MOC approaches: Tom O'Neill, PhD, American Board of Family Medicine
Healthcare Policy Approaches – The Role of Risk in Regulation
Regulators across the globe are increasingly evaluating risk to the public as they develop “right-sized” regulatory structures that vary in stringency. Risk has also been used to identify practitioners who may be more likely to harm the public. What is required to ensure practitioners are up to date in these various regulatory contexts?
- Role of Risk in “Right-touch Regulation” in the United Kingdom: Marc Seale, Health & Care Professions Council
- Dan Faulkner, MBA, College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario
- Participant/Facilitator: Tom Granatir, American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS)
Panel Discussion – What’s In The Future of Continuing Competence and Why?
- Christopher Butcher, M Div, Heuristic Solutions