Association of internship with performance on American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation certification examinations.

ABSTRACT: Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R) residents must complete twelve months of fundamental skills training prior to beginning PM&R residency. The objective of this study is to determine if characteristics of the first post-graduate year (PGY-1) impact performance on American Board of PM&R (ABPMR) initial certification examinations. A retrospective review was conducted on a deidentified ABPMR database of physicians who completed PM&R residency and took the Part I Examination between 2008 and 2022. Physicians who completed categorical residency programs in PM&R had higher pass rates on Part I than physicians who completed advanced programs. Physicians who completed a categorical program had higher scaled scores on the Part II Examination than physicians who completed either a transitional or non-transitional advanced program but pass rates did not differ. Completing less than 3 months of training in internal medicine prior to starting PM&R was associated with lower Part I and Part II Examination scaled scores than completing 3 or more months. Physicians who completed six or more months of internal medicine had higher Part I and Part II Examination pass rates and scaled scores than physicians who completed six or more months in surgery.

A qualitative study of strategies to improve occupational well-being in physical medicine and rehabilitation physicians.

BACKGROUND: Physiatry is a specialty with high rates of burnout. Although organizational strategies to combat burnout are key, it is also important to understand strategies that individual physiatrists can use to address burnout. OBJECTIVE: To identify changes that resulted in improvement of occupational well-being of physiatrists over a 6- to 9-month period. DESIGN: We employed two quantitative surveys spaced 6 to 9 months apart to identify physiatrists who experienced meaningful improvement in occupational burnout and/or professional fulfillment between the two survey timepoints. These physiatrists were subsequently recruited to participate in a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews to identify changes that respondents felt contributed to improvements in burnout and professional fulfillment. SETTING: Online surveys and interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Physiatrists in the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (AAPM&R) Membership Masterfile. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Burnout and professional fulfillment were assessed using the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index. RESULTS: One hundred twelve physiatrists responded to the baseline and follow-up surveys. Of these, 35 were eligible for interviews based on improvements in the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index, and 23 (64%) agreed to participate. Themes from the qualitative interviews highlighted the importance of personal lifestyle choices, approaches to improve professional satisfaction, and strategies to foster work-life harmony. Personal lifestyle strategies included investing in wellness and mental health. Efforts to improve professional satisfaction included decreasing work intensity, prioritizing meaningful aspects of work, and building relationships with colleagues. Fostering work-life harmony also included making trade-offs in both domains, setting boundaries at work, setting expectations at home, and overcoming personal challenges. CONCLUSION: Our findings illustrate that, in addition to organizational strategies demonstrated to be effective, there are actions that individual physiatrists can take to recover from burnout and foster professional fulfillment.

A Qualitative Study of Strategies to Improve Occupational Well-being in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Physiatry is a specialty with high rates of burnout. Although organizational strategies to combat burnout are key, it is also important to understand strategies that individual physiatrists can use to address burnout. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to identify changes that resulted in improvement of occupational well-being of physiatrists over a 6- to 9-mo period. DESIGN: We employed two quantitative surveys spaced 6-9 mos apart to identify physiatrists who experienced meaningful improvement in occupational burnout and/or professional fulfillment between the two survey time points. These physiatrists were subsequently recruited to participate in a qualitative study using semistructured interviews to identify changes that respondents felt contributed to improvements in burnout and professional fulfillment. SETTING: Online surveys and interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Physiatrists in the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (AAPM&R) Membership Masterfile. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Burnout and professional fulfillment were assessed using the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index. RESULTS: One hundred twelve physiatrists responded to the baseline and follow-up surveys. Of these, 35 were eligible for interviews based on improvements in the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index, and 23 (64%) agreed to participate. Themes from the qualitative interviews highlighted the importance of personal lifestyle choices, approaches to improve professional satisfaction, and strategies to foster work-life harmony. Personal lifestyle strategies included investing in wellness and mental health. Efforts to improve professional satisfaction included decreasing work intensity, prioritizing meaningful aspects of work, and building relationships with colleagues. Fostering work-life harmony also included making trade-offs in both domains, setting boundaries at work, setting expectations at home, and overcoming personal challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings illustrate that in addition to organizational strategies demonstrated to be effective, there are actions that individual physiatrists can take to recover from burnout and foster professional fulfillment.

Current practice focus trends in physical medicine and rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: Physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) is a diverse specialty, growing and evolving over a variety of subspecialty and practice focus areas. Accurate data regarding practice patterns of physiatrists are essential for updating requirements in training and certification, particularly as the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education begins its process to update of the PM&R core residency training requirements. This study analyzes practice trends for nearly 98% of physiatrists in active practice, the largest study to date. OBJECTIVE: To update current demographics of physicians specializing in PM&R, including current areas of practice focus, to analyze the alignment of practice focus with subspecialty certification, and to determine the extent that electromyography is a component of current physiatric practice. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of deidentified responses from American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (ABPMR) board-certified PM&R physicians (diplomates) on annual enrollment in the ABPMR Continuing Certification program. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 9543 ABPMR diplomates. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographics - age, gender, years in practice, practice setting(s) and area(s). Practice focus, subspecialty certifications. RESULTS: The majority of practicing physiatrists are men (62%) although the percentage of women in the field is growing (38%). Nearly 80% of physiatrists report more than one practice focus area, with pain medicine and sports medicine/musculoskeletal practices most commonly reported. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the growth trends in PM&R in pain and sports medicine but also highlights the substantial number of physiatrists focusing their practices in areas related to neurorehabilitation and medical rehabilitation. The large majority of physiatrists incorporate multiple focus areas into their practices. Electromyography is a focus for a declining percentage of practicing physiatrists.

Occupational Characteristics Associated With Professional Fulfillment and Burnout Among US Physiatrists.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple national studies suggest that among physicians, physiatrists are at increased risk for occupational burnout. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to identify characteristics of the work environment associated with professional fulfillment and burnout among US physiatrists. DESIGN: Between May and December 2021, a mixed qualitative and quantitative approach was used to identify factors contributing to professional fulfillment and burnout in physiatrists. SETTING: Online interviews, focus groups, and survey were conducted. PARTICIPANTS: The participants are physiatrists in the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Membership Masterfile. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Burnout and professional fulfillment were assessed using the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index. RESULTS: Individual interviews with 21 physiatrists were conducted to identify domains that contributed to professional fulfillment followed by focus groups for further definition. Based on themes identified, scales were identified or developed to evaluate: control over schedule (6 items, Cronbach α = 0.86); integration of physiatry into patient care (3 items, Cronbach α = 0.71); personal-organizational values alignment (3 items, Cronbach α = 0.90); meaningfulness of physiatrist clinical work (6 items, Cronbach α = 0.90); teamwork and collaboration (3 items, Cronbach α = 0.89). Of 5760 physiatrists contacted in the subsequent national survey, 882 (15.4%) returned surveys (median age, 52 yrs; 46.1% women). Overall, 42.6% (336 of 788) experienced burnout and 30.6% (244 of 798) had high levels of professional fulfillment. In multivariable analysis, each one-point improvement in control over schedule (odds ratio = 1.96; 95% confidence interval = 1.45-2.69), integration of physiatry into patient care (odds ratio = 1.77; 95% confidence interval = 1.32-2.38), personal-organizational values alignment (odds ratio = 1.92; 95% confidence interval = 1.48-2.52), meaningfulness of physiatrist clinical work (odds ratio = 2.79; 95% confidence interval = 1.71-4.71), and teamwork and collaboration score (odds ratio = 2.11; 95% confidence interval = 1.48-3.03) was independently associated with higher likelihood of professional fulfillment. CONCLUSIONS: Control over schedule, optimal integration of physiatry into clinical care, personal-organizational values alignment, teamwork, and meaningfulness of physiatrist clinical work are strong and independent drivers of occupational well-being in US physiatrists. Variation in these domains by practice setting and subspecialty suggests that tailored approaches are needed to promote professional fulfillment and reduce burnout among US physiatrists.

Occupational Characteristics Associated with Professional Fulfillment and Burnout Among U.S. Physiatrists.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple national studies suggest that, among physicians, physiatrists are at increased risk for occupational burnout. OBJECTIVE: To identify characteristics of the work environment associated with professional fulfillment and burnout among U.S. physiatrists. DESIGN: Between May and December 2021, a mixed qualitative and quantitative approach was used to identify factors contributing to professional fulfillment and burnout in physiatrists. SETTING: Online interviews, focus groups, and survey. PARTICIPANTS: Physiatrists in the AAPM&R Membership Masterfile. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Burnout and professional fulfillment assessed using the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index. RESULTS: Individual interviews with 21 physiatrists were conducted to identify domains that contributed to professional fulfillment followed by focus groups for further definition. Based on themes identified, scales were identified or developed to evaluate: control over schedule (6 items; Cronbach's alpha = 0.86); integration of physiatry into patient care (3 items; Cronbach's alpha = 0.71); personal-organizational values alignment (3 items; Cronbach's alpha = 0.90); meaningfulness of physiatrist clinical work (6 items; Cronbach's alpha = 0.90); teamwork and collaboration (3 items; Cronbach's alpha = 0.89). Of 5760 physiatrists contacted in the subsequent national survey, 882 (15.4%) returned surveys (median age 52 years; 46.1% women). Overall, 42.6% (336 of 788) experienced burnout and 30.6% (244 of 798) had high levels of professional fulfillment. In multivariable analysis, each one-point improvement in control over schedule (odds ratio [OR] = 1.96; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.45-2.69), integration of physiatry into patient care (OR = 1.77; 95% CI = 1.32-2.38), personal-organizational values alignment (OR = 1.92; 95% CI = 1.48-2.52), meaningfulness of physiatrist clinical work (OR = 2.79; 95% CI = 1.71-4.71) and teamwork and collaboration score (OR = 2.11; 95% CI = 1.48-3.03) was independently associated with higher likelihood of professional fulfillment. CONCLUSIONS: Control over schedule, optimal integration of physiatry into clinical care, personal-organizational values alignment, teamwork, and meaningfulness of physiatrist clinical work are strong and independent drivers of occupational well-being in U.S. physiatrists. Variation in these domains by practice setting and subspecialty suggests tailored approaches are needed to promote professional fulfillment and reduce burnout among U.S. physiatrists.

Current status and trends in subspecialty certification in physical medicine and rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: There is a need to better understand the overall state of sub-specialization in physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R). OBJECTIVE: To examine the status and trends in subspecialty certification for each of the seven subspecialties approved for American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (ABPMR) diplomates. DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective analysis of deidentified information from the ABPMR database. PARTICIPANTS: Physicians certified by ABPMR through 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For each subspecialty, we examined: (1) the number of certificates issued to ABPMR diplomates; (2) the recertification rate; (3) the yearly trends for total active, new, and expired certificates; and (4) for ABPMR-administered subspecialties, recertification rates for those entering the subspecialty through fellowship completion versus a "grandfathered" practice pathway. RESULTS: Of 11,421 ABPMR diplomates in the United States in 2019, a total of 3560 (31.2%) had 3985 active subspecialty certificates. Pain Medicine (PM) was the most common subspecialty certification (15.5% of all ABPMR diplomates) followed by Sports Medicine (SM, 6.6%), Brain Injury Medicine (BIM, 4.8%), Spinal Cord Injury Medicine (SCIM, 4.2%), Pediatric Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM, 2.5%), Neuromuscular Medicine (NMM, 0.7%), and Hospice and Palliative Medicine (HPM, 0.5%). For diplomates with more than one subspecialty certification, PM and SM was the most frequent combination. Both the recertification rate and the end of practice track eligibility influenced certification trends differently for individual subspecialties. The average number of new certificates added annually for every subspecialty was higher before than after the temporary practice track-based eligibility ended; the difference was statistically significant (p < .05) for SCIM, PM, SM, and NMM. The recertification rate for all subspecialties combined was 73.4%. For the subspecialties (SCIM, PRM) for which these data were available, fellowship candidates had higher recertification rates than those grandfathered through a practice track. CONCLUSION: This report informs stakeholders about the state and evolution of subspecialty certification in PM&R over time.

Improving Patient Safety and Quality in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Through Participation in the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Continuing Certification Program.

ABSTRACT: The American Board of Medical Specialties Continuing Certification Program's Improvement in Medical Practice Standard requires physicians to participate in practice improvement activities. Despite this universal requirement, there has been no assessment of this requirement or its potential impact on patient care. Because of its continuing certification oversight structure, the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation is in a unique position to provide this assessment. Review of quality improvement projects submitted to the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation for continuing certification compliance revealed that most diplomates (70.1%) used available topic-specific options. These projects are designed to be directive and easy to use for physicians with limited quality improvement experience. Examples of topic-directed project potential impact on patient care include preventing wrong-site injections through implementing a preprocedure timeout or decreasing opioid prescribing risk through implementation of an opioid risk assessment tool. Thirty percent of submissions described improvement efforts in other areas of practice. These projects were directed toward areas of patient care including safety, communication/education, satisfaction, processes, and outcomes. This study demonstrates the efforts of physiatrists to improve care and the potential impact of these efforts on patient care and safety through participation in continuing certification.

Why Do Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Physicians Lose American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Board Certification?

OBJECTIVE: Physicians can lose board certification through revocation related to professionalism violations or expiration due to failure to complete continuing certification requirements. The purpose of this study was to analyze the causes of board certification loss for physicians with board certification through the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study analyzed the certification status of 5541 American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation diplomates between 1993 and 2019 to determine reasons for certification loss. A focused analysis of diplomates with expired certificates in 2019 was conducted to further examine reasons for certificate expiration. RESULTS: Of 5541 physicians, 496 (9%) had certification expiration due to failure to meet continuing certification requirements and 60 (1%) had certification revocation due to disciplinary actions, without regaining certification across the study years. A focused analysis of physicians with expired certificates in 2019 revealed that the majority had failed to complete multiple components of continuing certification. Practice improvement was the single most common incomplete requirement. Failure to pass the knowledge assessment was an uncommon cause for certification loss. CONCLUSIONS: Certification expiration through failure to complete all continuing certification requirements, versus revocation, is responsible for most instances of board certification loss. Practice improvement was the most common incomplete requirement.

American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Diplomate Customization Choices on the Longitudinal Assessment for Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation: A First-Year Experience.

ABSTRACT: The American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation began administering the longitudinal assessment for physical medicine and rehabilitation for continuing certification in 2020. The longitudinal assessment for physical medicine and rehabilitation digitally delivers quarterly short assessments of content and repeats missed items to facilitate learning as well as serve as a summative certification assessment. With a goal of offering content relevant to an individual's practice and learning needs, diplomates choose how to customize the domains or topic areas of their question content on an annual basis. This report describes the first year of experience with customization of longitudinal assessment for physical medicine and rehabilitation. The American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation diplomate customization data are grouped and compared in a variety of ways to ascertain whether there are differences in customization choices. While customization choices were similar across several domains, significant differences were seen when comparing groups with specific areas of practice or subspecialty certification. Smaller differences were also seen when comparing question domain allocation choice between sexes, age groups, and practice setting. The results from this first full year of experience confirm an alignment of this innovative assessment approach to individual physician practice, a significant step in improving the relevance of continuing certification overall for participating physicians.

Taking Leave During Residency: Types of Absences and Subsequent Delays and Variations in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Medical Board Pass Rates.

ABSTRACT: There is limited literature examining the reasons physical medicine and rehabilitation residents take an extended leave of absence during residency and the impact of leave on board examination performance. Such information could better inform leave policies, help guide residency program directors, and potentially destigmatize taking leave. Study objectives were to describe the characteristics of physical medicine and rehabilitation residents who take leave during residency, compare differences in part I (written) and part II (oral) certification examination performance, and determine the prevalence of delays in taking board examinations. Study methodology was a retrospective analysis of deidentified information from the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation database between 2008 and 2020. Results indicated four reasons for extended leave of absence: medical, parental, academic/remediation, and unspecified personal reasons. Residents who took an extended leave of absence for medical or parental reasons had similar or better odds of passing their part I and part II examinations compared with those without leave. Residents who took leave for academic/remediation concerns or unspecified personal reasons had lower odds of passing their board examinations. Examination delays for those taking parental or personal health leaves did not affect board pass rates. Further investigation is needed to identify how to support residents on academic/remediation and unspecified leaves during training.

Key Findings From Peer-Reviewed Published Research by the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation in Review.

ABSTRACT: Recognizing the dearth of published research on board certification in physical medicine and rehabilitation and its subspecialties, the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation has increased efforts to conduct and disseminate research in this area. This report summarizes key findings of peer-reviewed studies published by American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation staff and leadership in the past 6 yrs, including those conducted in partnership with other entities. The reported studies are organized in three main categories: initial certification, continuing certification, and subspecialty certification in physical medicine and rehabilitation. Related findings are further grouped into subsections that include psychometric evaluation of certification examinations, association of candidate characteristics with certification performance, relationship of certification performance to other measures, and candidate reaction and feedback. Collectively, the summarized results provide evidence that the board certification process is reliable, statistically valid, and predictive of the risk of disciplinary action in subsequent years. These studies also describe facets of our specialty including degree of subspecialization, burnout, and how people maintain certification over time. We hope that physical medicine and rehabilitation trainees, diplomates, institutions, programs, and other stakeholders find this information useful and look forward to continuing research in these and other areas in the spirit of constant evidence-based improvement and feedback to our specialty.

Interrater Reliability in the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Part II Certification Examination: Impact of a New Assessment Design.

OBJECTIVE: The design of medical board certification examinations continues to evolve with advances in testing innovations and psychometric analysis. The potential for subjectivity is inherent in the design of oral board examinations, making improvements in reliability and validity especially important. The purpose of this quality improvement study was to analyze the impact of using two examiners on the overall reliability of the oral certification examination in physical medicine and rehabilitation. DESIGN: This was a retrospective quality improvement study of 422 candidates for the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Part II Examination in 2020. Candidates were examined by examiner pairs, each of whom submitted independent scores. Training for all 116 examiners included examination case review, scoring guidelines, and bias mitigation. Examiner performance was analyzed for both internal consistency (intrarater reliability) and agreement with their paired examiner (interrater reliability). RESULTS: The reliability of the Part II Examination was high, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 over three administrations. The analysis also demonstrated high interrater agreement and examiner internal consistency. CONCLUSIONS: A high degree of interrater agreement was found using a new, two-examiner format. Comprehensive examiner training is likely the most significant factor for this finding. The two-examiner format improved the overall reliability and validity of the Part II Examination.

Do Milestone Ratings Predict Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Board Certification Examination Scores?

ABSTRACT: The Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education developed the Milestones to assist training programs in assessing resident physicians in the context of their participation in Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education-accredited training programs. Biannual assessments are done over a resident's entire training period to define the trajectory in achieving specialty-specific competencies. As part of its process of initial certification, the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation requires successful completion of two examinations administered approximately 9 mos apart. The Part I Examination measures a single dimensional construct, physical medicine and rehabilitation medical knowledge, whereas Part II assesses the application of medical and physiatric knowledge to multiple domains, including data acquisition, problem solving, patient management, systems-based practice, and interpersonal and communication skills through specific patient case scenarios. This study aimed to investigate the validity of the Milestones by demonstrating its association with performance in the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation certifying examinations. A cohort of 233 physical medicine and rehabilitation trainees in 3-yr residency programs (postgraduate year 2 entry) in the United States from academic years 2014-2016, who also took the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Parts I and II certifying examinations between 2016 and 2018, were included in the study. Milestones ratings in four distinct observation periods were correlated with scores in the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Parts I and II Examinations. Milestones ratings of medical knowledge (but not patient care, professionalism, problem-based learning, interpersonal and communication skills, and systems-based practice) predicted performance in subsequent Part I American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Examination, but none of the Milestone ratings correlated with Part II Examination scaled scores.

Board Certification in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation: A New Approach for a New Era.

ABSTRACT: The American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation's revised mission and vision emphasize lifelong learning throughout its board certification processes. More formative approaches have been incorporated into both initial and continuing certification. These changes are based in adult learning theory and are supported by an ongoing board research endeavor. Board certification in the future is envisioned as a partnership with physicians to facilitate ongoing learning and positively impact patient outcomes.

Influence of Sex and Age on Ratings of Confidence and Relevance in Continuing Certification Longitudinal Assessment: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: Longitudinal assessments use spaced repetition of items to facilitate learning. Algorithms selecting repetition items can prioritize various properties for future presentation. The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate the relationship between participant ratings of item-specific confidence and/or practice relevance and participant age, sex, and response correctness. DESIGN: This is a prospective quality improvement study of 403 American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation diplomates with time-limited certificates. Participants answered 20 items quarterly over four quarters, rating each item on its relevance to their practice and their confidence in their response. RESULTS: The relationship between sex and ratings of response confidence was significant, with women less likely than men to be confident in their responses, regardless of correctness. Younger physicians were significantly more confident in their responses and rated items as more practice relevant. CONCLUSIONS: Women physicians were less confident than men in their item-specific confidence ratings, regardless of correctness, on the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation continuing certification longitudinal knowledge assessment. Older physicians were less confident in their responses than younger physicians. The findings supported the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation prioritization of response correctness and practice relevance, rather than response confidence, to select items for spaced repetition in American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation's continuing certification longitudinal assessment.

Positive Professionalism.

The evaluation of professionalism is embedded in the American Board of Medical Specialties' continuing certification programs for its 24 member boards.1 Currently, professionalism assessment is largely restricted to documenting professional standing, such as the status of medical licenses and medical staff privileges. With increased recognition of an expanded view of professionalism to include professional behaviors and competencies comes an opportunity for medical specialty boards to embrace a more formative approach to professionalism assessment. The goal of such an approach is to educate, reaffirm, and reinforce positive professional behaviors long beyond completion of formal medical education.

Evaluation of Longitudinal Assessment for Use in Maintenance of Certification.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate a longitudinal assessment program for physical medicine and rehabilitation (LA-PM&R) as a replacement for the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation maintenance of certification examination. DESIGN: In this quality improvement study, randomly selected American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation diplomates were invited to participate in the LA-PM&R. Participants' maintenance of certification scaled scores were compared with LA-PM&R nonparticipants. We examined the association between LA-PM&R scores and maintenance of certification scaled scores and performance on clone items placed on both examinations. RESULTS: There were 2222 American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation diplomates eligible to take the maintenance of certification examination from February 2018 to February 2019. Invitations were sent to 1050 randomly selected diplomates, of whom 448 initially agreed. Three hundred eighteen individuals completed more than two quarters of LA-PM&R participation and took the maintenance of certification examination. Two hundred sixty-six diplomates took the maintenance of certification examination in the same period who did not participate in LA-PM&R. The LA-PM&R group scored higher on the maintenance of certification examination than the control group (P < 0.05). Performance on the two examinations were highly correlated, r = .50, P < 0.0001. On clone items, LA-PM&R participants had 74% correct on the LA-PM&R but 86% correct on the maintenance of certification examination (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The LA-PM&R program leads to better learning and retention of information than the 10-yr maintenance of certification examination.