- Email: [email protected]
The American Board: What it means to you and me
The American Board: What it means to you and me HERBERT C”incinnati,
G.
FRANKEL,
D.D.S.
Ohio
year, when we were planning the Great Lakes Society of Orthodontists’ meeting at Cincinnati, I suggested to President Hunter I. Miller that it might be a novel idea to include in our activities a breakfast for members of the American Board of Orthodontists. We discussed the idea at length, and after Arthur Lewis of Dayton consented to act as chairman and Ed Martinek accepted the assignment of addressing the group, we decided to make it an open meeting and invite all of our members who might be interested in taking the Board examination, as well as the diplomates. You are all aware of the success of that breakfast; we had an attendance of 65. One of the things that surprised me when I was planning this affair was the fact that in the Great Lakes Society there were only 50 diplomates out of a membership of 300. To me this was a shocking revelation, I had always been under the impression that it was the ultimate ambition of every orthodontist to achieve the goal of certification by the Board. Our Association has always proudly acclaimed the fact that ours was the first authorized board in dentistry and that we were gratified by the number of diplomates that we possessed. But can we be so proud of the fact that only 20 per cent of our members have taken the opportunity to submit themselves to this task? I feel that we should have nothing but praise for those men who have taken their valuable time to prepare and complete the work required for Board certification. In order that I might get a better picture of the entire American Board of Orthodontics, I decided to make a survey of my own to see how the other components of the A. A. 0. were doing. I used the 1960 Orthodontic Directory of the World, and I broke the survey down by states. I totaled the diplomates in each state and then the orthodontists practicing in each state. I do not claim that my
LAST
Presented Fla., Nov.
766
before the Great Lakes 26 to Dec. 1, 1961.
Society
of
Orthodontists’
luncheon,
Miami
Beach,
The American
Board
Table I State, province,
etc.
Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texaz Armed Forces Utah Vermont Virginia Washington
A.B.O.
&plow&es
Orthodontists
4 0 4 2 56 5 13 2 6 10 5 0 1 32 7 3 4 3 4 1 5 18 17 9 2 11 1 5 0 0 35 0 120 3 1 22 4 7 29 2 3 1 0 9 15 1 2 0 4 17 (Continued
36 1 25 17 479 48 93 6 30 103 42 16 10 190 47 43 42 27 60 13 63 170 101 50 26 96 13 27 7 12 207 9 698 41 5 144 30 26 199 11 15 10 6 49 175 5 13 6 57 61 on following
page.)
Per
cent 11 0 16 11% 12
lwz 14 3% 20 10 12 0 10 17 14 7 9% 11
6% 7% 7?4 15 17 18 7% 11% 7% 19 0 0 17 0 17 7 20 15 13 27 14% 18 20 10 0 18
8% 20 15 0 7 29
7 67
768
Am.
Prankel
Table I-cant
J. Orthodontics
October1962
‘d
state, prcwince,
West Virginia Wisconsin TVyoming
etc.
A.R.O.
diplomates 1 10 1
Orthodontists
Per
cent
17 48 5
6 20 20
7 8 5 1 3 69 36 20
0 25 0 0 0 2 11 0
Canada Alberta British Columbia Manitoba New Brunswick Nova Scotia Ontario Quebec Saskatchewan
figures are entirely correct, as the Directory lists the same orthodontist twice if he has two locations and also if he commutes to other cities. For the most part, however, I believe that I have a pretty good picture of the problem. I have listed these in Table I, and I shall refer only to those which I feel pertain to our Society and compare with other components. Now that we have seen the entire picture, what should we do about it 4 I would like to make some constructive suggestions. In the first place, with all the agitation from the American Dental Association about certifying boards for specialists, it seems to me that we should now begin to urge all our members to take the Board examination, and all of us who are diplomates should stand ready to help those who wish to prepare for this work. Another thing that really amazed me was to find that so many orthodontists in the Directory who had preceptored or associated with men who were diplomates have never applied for Board certification, and some of these men have been in practice for many years. I also found that in some universities the head of the Orthodontic Department was not a diplomate and some of the instructors also had not taken theii Board examinations. I realize that Board certification is not compulsory, but I doubt if you will find the same situation in medical specialty departments. Also, I am of the opinion that in order for an orthodontist to qualify for a senior preceptorship, he should first qualify for certification by the American Board of Orthodontists. Again, I realize that this has not been set down in our rules or regulations for preceptorship, but I feel that if a member takes the time and effort to get his Board certification, he will also apply himself wholeheartedly to the task of preceptorship. Finally, I believe that the American Board of Orthodontics should take a more prominent part in the formal university and preceptorship programs. It might be well for us to change our ideas of certification and adopt the methods used by medical boards. It is my opinion that when a student of a formal university course or preceptorship has finished his training, he should then present
The American
Board
76 9
himself to the American Board for preliminary certification. His recordsshould bescrutinized by the Board, and he shouldbe given certain credits for the courses that he has taken toward his Board certification. He should then be given a specific period in which to complete his requirements for certification by the American Board of Orthodontics. If this method is adopted, every orthodontist will become a diplomate and there will be no question as to his status as a specialist. I know that what I have outlined is a radical departure from the practices of the day and that it will probably stir up a lot of discussion, but I feel that something radical must be done if we hope to keep up the standards for which we aim. It is a cinch that the methods of getting men to submit to the American Board of Orthodontics are not producing the desired results. This is shown by the low percentage of diplomates. We should exert every effort to urge all orthodontists to prepare and submit themselves for certification. ‘As the dental leader in the field of certification, it behooves orthodontics to practice what it preaches. Ih)ctor’.~
Bldg.
G.
FRANKEL,
D.D.S.
Ohio
year, when we were planning the Great Lakes Society of Orthodontists’ meeting at Cincinnati, I suggested to President Hunter I. Miller that it might be a novel idea to include in our activities a breakfast for members of the American Board of Orthodontists. We discussed the idea at length, and after Arthur Lewis of Dayton consented to act as chairman and Ed Martinek accepted the assignment of addressing the group, we decided to make it an open meeting and invite all of our members who might be interested in taking the Board examination, as well as the diplomates. You are all aware of the success of that breakfast; we had an attendance of 65. One of the things that surprised me when I was planning this affair was the fact that in the Great Lakes Society there were only 50 diplomates out of a membership of 300. To me this was a shocking revelation, I had always been under the impression that it was the ultimate ambition of every orthodontist to achieve the goal of certification by the Board. Our Association has always proudly acclaimed the fact that ours was the first authorized board in dentistry and that we were gratified by the number of diplomates that we possessed. But can we be so proud of the fact that only 20 per cent of our members have taken the opportunity to submit themselves to this task? I feel that we should have nothing but praise for those men who have taken their valuable time to prepare and complete the work required for Board certification. In order that I might get a better picture of the entire American Board of Orthodontics, I decided to make a survey of my own to see how the other components of the A. A. 0. were doing. I used the 1960 Orthodontic Directory of the World, and I broke the survey down by states. I totaled the diplomates in each state and then the orthodontists practicing in each state. I do not claim that my
LAST
Presented Fla., Nov.
766
before the Great Lakes 26 to Dec. 1, 1961.
Society
of
Orthodontists’
luncheon,
Miami
Beach,
The American
Board
Table I State, province,
etc.
Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texaz Armed Forces Utah Vermont Virginia Washington
A.B.O.
&plow&es
Orthodontists
4 0 4 2 56 5 13 2 6 10 5 0 1 32 7 3 4 3 4 1 5 18 17 9 2 11 1 5 0 0 35 0 120 3 1 22 4 7 29 2 3 1 0 9 15 1 2 0 4 17 (Continued
36 1 25 17 479 48 93 6 30 103 42 16 10 190 47 43 42 27 60 13 63 170 101 50 26 96 13 27 7 12 207 9 698 41 5 144 30 26 199 11 15 10 6 49 175 5 13 6 57 61 on following
page.)
Per
cent 11 0 16 11% 12
lwz 14 3% 20 10 12 0 10 17 14 7 9% 11
6% 7% 7?4 15 17 18 7% 11% 7% 19 0 0 17 0 17 7 20 15 13 27 14% 18 20 10 0 18
8% 20 15 0 7 29
7 67
768
Am.
Prankel
Table I-cant
J. Orthodontics
October1962
‘d
state, prcwince,
West Virginia Wisconsin TVyoming
etc.
A.R.O.
diplomates 1 10 1
Orthodontists
Per
cent
17 48 5
6 20 20
7 8 5 1 3 69 36 20
0 25 0 0 0 2 11 0
Canada Alberta British Columbia Manitoba New Brunswick Nova Scotia Ontario Quebec Saskatchewan
figures are entirely correct, as the Directory lists the same orthodontist twice if he has two locations and also if he commutes to other cities. For the most part, however, I believe that I have a pretty good picture of the problem. I have listed these in Table I, and I shall refer only to those which I feel pertain to our Society and compare with other components. Now that we have seen the entire picture, what should we do about it 4 I would like to make some constructive suggestions. In the first place, with all the agitation from the American Dental Association about certifying boards for specialists, it seems to me that we should now begin to urge all our members to take the Board examination, and all of us who are diplomates should stand ready to help those who wish to prepare for this work. Another thing that really amazed me was to find that so many orthodontists in the Directory who had preceptored or associated with men who were diplomates have never applied for Board certification, and some of these men have been in practice for many years. I also found that in some universities the head of the Orthodontic Department was not a diplomate and some of the instructors also had not taken theii Board examinations. I realize that Board certification is not compulsory, but I doubt if you will find the same situation in medical specialty departments. Also, I am of the opinion that in order for an orthodontist to qualify for a senior preceptorship, he should first qualify for certification by the American Board of Orthodontists. Again, I realize that this has not been set down in our rules or regulations for preceptorship, but I feel that if a member takes the time and effort to get his Board certification, he will also apply himself wholeheartedly to the task of preceptorship. Finally, I believe that the American Board of Orthodontics should take a more prominent part in the formal university and preceptorship programs. It might be well for us to change our ideas of certification and adopt the methods used by medical boards. It is my opinion that when a student of a formal university course or preceptorship has finished his training, he should then present
The American
Board
76 9
himself to the American Board for preliminary certification. His recordsshould bescrutinized by the Board, and he shouldbe given certain credits for the courses that he has taken toward his Board certification. He should then be given a specific period in which to complete his requirements for certification by the American Board of Orthodontics. If this method is adopted, every orthodontist will become a diplomate and there will be no question as to his status as a specialist. I know that what I have outlined is a radical departure from the practices of the day and that it will probably stir up a lot of discussion, but I feel that something radical must be done if we hope to keep up the standards for which we aim. It is a cinch that the methods of getting men to submit to the American Board of Orthodontics are not producing the desired results. This is shown by the low percentage of diplomates. We should exert every effort to urge all orthodontists to prepare and submit themselves for certification. ‘As the dental leader in the field of certification, it behooves orthodontics to practice what it preaches. Ih)ctor’.~
Bldg.