A Look at Demographics and Transition to Virtual Assessments: An Analysis of Bias in the American Board of Surgery General Surgery Certifying Exams.

OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were (1) to assess if examiner ratings in the American Board of Surgery (ABS) General Surgery Cetifying Exam (CE) are biased based on the gender, race, and ethnicity of the candidate or the examiners, and (2) if the format of delivering of the exams, in-person or virtual, affects how examiners rate candidates. DESIGN: We included every candidate-examiner combination for first time takers of the general surgery oral exam. Total scores and pass/fail outcomes based on the 4 scores given by examiners to candidates were analyzed using multilevel models, with candidates as random effects. Explanatory variables included the gender, race, and ethnicity of candidates and examiners, and the format of the exam (in-person or virtual). Candidates' first attempt scores on the ABS General Surgery Qualifying Exam (QE) were also included in the models to control for the baseline knowledge of the candidate. Three sets of models were evaluated for each demographic variable (gender, race, ethnicity) due to missingness in data. p-values and coefficients of determination R2 were used to quantify the statistical and practical significance of the model coefficients (an existent relationship between the explored variables on CE scores was considered statistically and practically significant if the p-value was lower than 0.01 and R2 higher than 1%). PARTICIPANTS: All first-time takers of the American Board of Surgery General Surgery Certifying Exam from 2016 to 2022 that had demographic data, and the examiners that participated in those exams. RESULTS: The number of candidates/examiners for the 3 sets of models was 8665/514 (gender), 5906/465 (race), and 4678/295 (ethnicity). The demographic variables, format of the exam, or their interactions were not found to significantly relate to examiner-candidate ratings or pass/fail outcomes. The only variable that was significantly related to CE scores was candidates' QE scores, which was added to the models as a measure of candidates' initial knowledge; this held for all models for total scores (F[1,8659] = 1069.89, p-value < 0.01, R2 = 5% [gender models], F(1,5696.3) = 589.13, p-value < 0.01, R2 = 5% [race models], F(1,4459.5) = 278.33, p-value < 0.01, R2 = 5% [ethnicity models]), and pass/fail outcomes (CI = 1.61-1.73, p-value < 0.01, R2 = 3% [gender models], CI = 1.67-1.85, p-value < 0.01, R2 = 3% [race models], CI = 2.17-2.90, p-value < 0.01, R2 = 3% [ethnicity models]). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that there is not a relationship between candidate and examiner gender, race, or ethnicity, and exam outcomes based on statistical models looking at examiner-candidate ratings and pass/fail outcomes. In addition, the delivery of the certifying exam in a virtual format appears to have no statistical impact on outcomes compared to in-person delivery. This suggests that the ABS is performing well in both demographic bias and virtual space.

How Does the Sequence of the American Board of Surgery Examinations Impact Pass/Fail Outcomes?

OBJECTIVE: Historically, the American Board of Surgery required surgeons to pass the qualifying examination (QE) before taking the certifying examination (CE). However, in the 2020-2021 academic year, with mitigating circumstances related to COVID-19, the ABS removed this sequencing requirement to facilitate the certification process for those candidates who were negatively impacted by a QE delivery failure. This decoupling of the traditional order of exam delivery has provided a natural comparator to the traditional route and an analysis of the impact of examination sequencing on candidate performance. METHODS: All candidates who applied for the canceled July 2020 QE were allowed to take the CE before passing the QE. The sample was then reduced to include only first-time candidates to ensure comparable groups for performance outcomes. Logistic regression was used to analyze the relationship between the order of taking the QE and the CE, controlling for other examination performance, international medical graduate status, and gender. RESULTS: Only first-time candidates who took both examinations were compared (n=947). Examination sequence was not a significant predictor of QE pass/fail outcomes, OR=0.54; 95% CI, 0.19-1.61, P =0.26. However, examination sequence was a significant predictor of CE pass/fail outcomes, OR=2.54; 95% CI, 1.46-4.68, P =0.002. CONCLUSIONS: This important study suggests that preparation for the QE increases the probability of passing the CE and provides evidence that knowledge may be foundational for clinical judgment. The ABS will consider these findings for examination sequencing moving forward.

Association Between American Board of Surgery Initial Certification and Medical Malpractice Payments.

OBJECTIVE: To measure associations between surgeons' examination performance and obtaining American Board of Surgery certification with the likelihood of having medical malpractice payments. BACKGROUND: Further research is needed to establish a broader understanding of the association of board certification and patient and practice outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective analysis using propensity score-matched surgeons who attempted to obtain American Board of Surgery certification. Surgeons who completed residency between 2000 and 2019 (n=910) and attempted to become certified were categorized as certified or failing to obtain certification. In addition, groups were categorized as either passing or failing their first attempt on the qualifying and certifying examinations. Malpractice payment reports were dichotomized for surgeons who either had a payment report or not. RESULTS: The hazard rate (HR) of malpractice payment reports was significantly greater for surgeons who attempted and failed to obtain certification [HR=1.87; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.28-2.74] than for surgeons who were certified. Moreover, surgeons who failed either the qualifying (HR=1.64; 95% CI, 1.14-2.37) or certifying examination (HR=1.72; 95% CI, 1.14-2.60) had significantly higher malpractice payment HRs than those who passed the examinations on their first attempt. CONCLUSIONS: Failing to obtain board certification was associated with a higher rate of medical malpractice payments. In addition, failing examinations in the certification examination process on the first attempt was also associated with higher rates of medical malpractice payments. This study provides further evidence that board certification is linked to potential indicators for patient outcomes and practice quality.

Implementation of the Vascular Surgery Board virtual certifying examination.

OBJECTIVE: The onset of the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic mandated postponement of the in-person Vascular Surgery Board 2020 certifying examination (CE). Vascular surgery virtual CEs (VVCEs) were developed for the scheduled 2020 CEs (rescheduled to January 2021) and 2021 CEs (rescheduled to July 2021) to avoid postponing the certification testing. In the present study, we have reported the development, implementation, and outcomes of the first two VVCEs. METHODS: The VVCE was similar to the in-person format (three 30-minutes sessions, two examiners, four questions) but required a proctor and a host. In contrast to the general surgery VCEs, the VVCE also incorporated images. The candidates and examiners were instructed on the format, and technology checks were performed before the VVCE. The candidates were given the opportunity to invalidate their examination for technology-related reasons immediately after the examination. Postexamination surveys were administered to all the participants. RESULTS: The VVCEs were completed by 356 of 357 candidates (99.7%). The pass rates for the January 2021 and July 2021 examinations were 97.6% (first time, 99.4%; retake, 70%) and 94.7% (first time, 94.6%; retake, 100%), respectively. The pass rates were not significantly different from the 2019 in-person CE (χ2 = 2.30; P = .13; and χ2 = 0.01; P = .91, for the January 2021 and July 2021 examinations, respectively). None of the candidates had invalidated their examination. The candidates (162 of 356; 46%), examiners (64 of 118; 54%), proctors (25 of 27; 93%), and hosts (8 of 9; 89%) completing the survey were very satisfied with the examination (Likert score 4 or 5: candidates, 92.6%; noncandidates, 96.9%) and found the technology domains (Zoom, audio, video, viewing images) to be very good (Likert score 4 or 5), with candidate and other responder scores of 73% to 84% and >94%, respectively. Significantly more of the candidates had favored a future VVCE compared with the examiners (87% vs 32%; χ2 = 67.1; P < .001). The free text responses from all responders had commented favorably on the organization and implementation of the examination. However, some candidates had expressed concerns about image sizes, and some examiners had expressed concern about the time constraints for the question format. The candidates appreciated the convenience of an at-home examination, especially the avoidance of travel costs. CONCLUSIONS: The two Vascular Surgery Board VCEs were shown to be psychometrically sound and were overwhelmingly successful, demonstrating that image-based virtual examinations are feasible and could become the standard for the future.

Outcomes of the First Virtual General Surgery Certifying Exam of the American Board of Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To Study the Outcomes of the First Virtual General Surgery Certifying Exam of the American Board of Surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The ABS General Surgery CE is normally an in-person oral examination. Due to the COVID-19 outbreak, the ABS was required to reschedule these. After 2 small pilots, the CE's October administration represented the first large-scale remote virtual exam. The purpose of this report is to compare the outcomes of this virtual and the previous in-person CEs. METHODS: CE candidates were asked to provide feedback on their experience via a survey. The passing rate was compared to the 1025 candidates who took the 2019-2020 in-person CEs. RESULTS: Of the 308 candidates who registered for the virtual CE, 306 completed the exam (99.4%) and 188 completed the survey (61.4%). The majority had a very positive experience. They rated the virtual CE as very good/excellent in security (90%), ease of exam platform (77%), audio quality (71%), video quality (69%), and overall satisfaction (86%). Notably, when asked their preference, 78% preferred the virtual exam. There were no differences in the passing rates between the virtual or in-person exams. CONCLUSIONS: The first virtual CE by the ABS was completed using available internet technology. There was high satisfaction, with the majority preferring the virtual platform. Compared to past in-person CEs, there was no difference in outcomes as measured by passing rates. These data suggest that expansion of the virtual CE may be desirable.