A comparison of the American Board of Anesthesiology's in-person and virtual objective structured clinical examinations.

BACKGROUND: The American Board of Anesthesiology's Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), as a component of its initial certification process, had been administered in-person in a dedicated assessment center since its launch in 2018 until March 2020. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, a virtual format of the exam was piloted in December 2020 and was administered in 2021. This study aimed to compare candidate performance, examiner grading severity, and scenario difficulty between these two formats of the OSCE. METHODS: The Many-Facet Rasch Model was utilized to estimate candidate performance, examiner grading severity, and scenario difficulty for the in-person and virtual OSCEs separately. The virtual OSCE was equated to the in-person OSCE by common examiners and common scenarios. Independent-samples t-test was used to compare candidate performance, and partially overlapping samples t-tests were applied to compare examiner grading severity and scenario difficulty between the in-person and virtual OSCEs. RESULTS: The in-person (n = 3235) and virtual (n = 2934) first-time candidates were comparable in age, sex, race/ethnicity, and whether U.S. medical school graduates. The virtual scenarios (n = 35, mean [0.21] ± SD [0.38] in logits) were more difficult than the in-person scenarios (n = 93, 0.00 ± 0.69, Welch's partially overlapping samples t-test, p = 0.01); there were no statistically significant differences in examiner severity (n = 390, -0.01 ± 0.82 vs. n = 304, -0.02 ± 0.93, Welch's partially overlapping samples t-test, p = 0.81) or candidate performance (2.19 ± 0.93 vs. 2.18 ± 0.92, Welch's independent samples t-test, p = 0.83) between the in-person and virtual OSCEs. CONCLUSIONS: Our retrospective analyses of first-time OSCEs found comparable candidate performance and examiner grading severity between the in-person and virtual formats, despite the virtual scenarios being more difficult than the in-person scenarios. These results provided assurance that the virtual OSCE functioned reasonably well in a high-stakes setting.

A comparison of 3- and 4-option multiple-choice items for medical subspecialty in-training examinations.

BACKGROUND: The American Board of Anesthesiology piloted 3-option multiple-choice items (MCIs) for its 2020 administration of 150-item subspecialty in-training examinations for Critical Care Medicine (ITE-CCM) and Pediatric Anesthesiology (ITE-PA). The 3-option MCIs were transformed from their 4-option counterparts, which were administered in 2019, by removing the least effective distractor. The purpose of this study was to compare physician performance, response time, and item and exam characteristics between the 4-option and 3-option exams. METHODS: Independent-samples t-test was used to examine the differences in physician percent-correct score; paired t-test was used to examine the differences in response time and item characteristics. The Kuder and Richardson Formula 20 was used to calculate the reliability of each exam form. Both the traditional (distractor being selected by fewer than 5% of examinees and/or showing a positive correlation with total score) and sliding scale (adjusting the frequency threshold of distractor being chosen by item difficulty) methods were used to identify non-functioning distractors (NFDs). RESULTS: Physicians who took the 3-option ITE-CCM (mean = 67.7%) scored 2.1 percent correct higher than those who took the 4-option ITE-CCM (65.7%). Accordingly, 3-option ITE-CCM items were significantly easier than their 4-option counterparts. No such differences were found between the 4-option and 3-option ITE-PAs (71.8% versus 71.7%). Item discrimination (4-option ITE-CCM [an average of 0.13], 3-option ITE-CCM [0.12]; 4-option ITE-PA [0.08], 3-option ITE-PA [0.09]) and exam reliability (0.75 and 0.74 for 4- and 3-option ITE-CCMs, respectively; 0.62 and 0.67 for 4-option and 3-option ITE-PAs, respectively) were similar between these two formats for both ITEs. On average, physicians spent 3.4 (55.5 versus 58.9) and 1.3 (46.2 versus 47.5) seconds less per item on 3-option items than 4-option items for ITE-CCM and ITE-PA, respectively. Using the traditional method, the percentage of NFDs dropped from 51.3% in the 4-option ITE-CCM to 37.0% in the 3-option ITE-CCM and from 62.7% to 46.0% for the ITE-PA; using the sliding scale method, the percentage of NFDs dropped from 36.0% to 21.7% for the ITE-CCM and from 44.9% to 27.7% for the ITE-PA. CONCLUSIONS: Three-option MCIs function as robustly as their 4-option counterparts. The efficiency achieved by spending less time on each item poses opportunities to increase content coverage for a fixed testing period. The results should be interpreted in the context of exam content and distribution of examinee abilities.

A Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic Pivot: Development of the American Board of Anesthesiology's Virtual APPLIED Examination.

In 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic interrupted the administration of the APPLIED Examination, the final part of the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) staged examination system for initial certification. In response, the ABA developed, piloted, and implemented an Internet-based "virtual" form of the examination to allow administration of both components of the APPLIED Exam (Standardized Oral Examination and Objective Structured Clinical Examination) when it was impractical and unsafe for candidates and examiners to travel and have in-person interactions. This article describes the development of the ABA virtual APPLIED Examination, including its rationale, examination format, technology infrastructure, candidate communication, and examiner training. Although the logistics are formidable, we report a methodology for successfully introducing a large-scale, high-stakes, 2-element, remote examination that replicates previously validated assessments.

Demographic Trends From 2005 to 2015 Among Physicians With Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-Accredited Anesthesiology Training and Active Medical Licenses.

BACKGROUND: A temporary decrease in anesthesiology residency graduates that occurred around the turn of the millennium may have workforce implications. The aims of this study are to describe, between 2005 and 2015, (1) demographic changes in the workforce of physicians trained as anesthesiologists; (2) national and state densities of these physicians, as well as temporal changes in the densities; and (3) retention of medical licenses by mid- and later-career anesthesiologists. METHODS: Using records from the American Board of Anesthesiology and state medical and osteopathic boards, the numbers of licensed physicians aged 30-59 years who had completed Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited anesthesiology residency training were calculated cross-sectionally for 2005, 2010, and 2015. Demographic trends were then described. Census data were used to calculate national and state densities of licensed physicians. Individual longitudinal data were used to describe retention of medical licenses among older physicians. RESULTS: The number of licensed physicians trained as anesthesiologists aged 30-59 years increased from 32,644 in 2005 to 36,543 in 2010 and 36,624 in 2015, representing a national density of 1.10, 1.18, and 1.14 per 10,000 population in those years, respectively. The density of anesthesiologists among states ranged from 0.37 to 3.10 per 10,000 population. The age distribution differed across the years. For example, anesthesiologists aged 40-49 years predominated in 2005 (47%), but by 2015, only 31% of anesthesiologists were aged 40-49 years. The proportion of female anesthesiologists grew from 22% in 2005, to 24% in 2010, and to 28% in 2015, particularly among early-career anesthesiologists. For anesthesiologists with licenses in 2005, the number who still had active licenses in 2015 decreased by 9.6% for those aged 45-49 years, by 14.1% for those aged 50-54 years, and by 19.7% for those aged 55-59 years. CONCLUSIONS: The temporary decrease in anesthesiology residency graduates around the turn of the 21st century decreased the proportion of anesthesiologists who were midcareer as of 2015. This may affect the future availability of senior leaders as well as the future overall workforce in the specialty as older anesthesiologists retire. National efforts to plan for workforce needs should recognize the geographical variability in the distribution of anesthesiologists.

Construct Validation of the American Board of Anesthesiology's APPLIED Examination for Initial Certification.

BACKGROUND: The American Board of Anesthesiology administers the APPLIED Examination as a part of initial certification, which as of 2018 includes 2 components-the Standardized Oral Examination (SOE) and the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). The goal of this study is to investigate the measurement construct(s) of the APPLIED Examination to assess whether the SOE and the OSCE measure distinct constructs (ie, factors). METHODS: Exploratory item factor analysis of candidates' performance ratings was used to determine the number of constructs, and confirmatory item factor analysis to estimate factor loadings within each construct and correlation(s) between the constructs. RESULTS: In exploratory item factor analysis, the log-likelihood ratio test and Akaike information criterion index favored the 3-factor model, with factors reflecting the SOE, OSCE Communication and Professionalism, and OSCE Technical Skills. The Bayesian information criterion index favored the 2-factor model, with factors reflecting the SOE and the OSCE. In confirmatory item factor analysis, both models suggest moderate correlation between the SOE factor and the OSCE factor; the correlation was 0.49 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.55) for the 3-factor model and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.54-0.64) for the 2-factor model. The factor loadings were lower for Technical Skills stations of the OSCE (ranging from 0.11 to 0.25) compared with those of the SOE and Communication and Professionalism stations of the OSCE (ranging from 0.36 to 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: The analyses provide evidence that the SOE and the OSCE measure distinct constructs, supporting the rationale for administering both components of the APPLIED Examination for initial certification in anesthesiology.

First-Year Results of the American Board of Anesthesiology's Objective Structured Clinical Examination for Initial Certification.

In 2018, the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) became the first US medical specialty certifying board to incorporate an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) into its initial certification examination system. Previously, the ABA's staged examination system consisted of 2 written examinations (the BASIC and ADVANCED examinations) and the Standardized Oral Examination (SOE). The OSCE and the existing SOE are now 2 separate components of the APPLIED Examination. This report presents the results of the first-year OSCE administration. A total of 1410 candidates took both the OSCE and the SOE in 2018. Candidate performance approximated a normal distribution for both the OSCE and the SOE, and was not associated with the timing of the examination, including day of the week, morning versus afternoon session, and order of the OSCE and the SOE. Practice-based Learning and Improvement was the most difficult station, while Application of Ultrasonography was the least difficult. The correlation coefficient between SOE and OSCE scores was 0.35 ([95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.30-0.39]; P < .001). Scores for the written ADVANCED Examination were modestly correlated with scores for the SOE (r = 0.29 [95% CI, 0.25-0.34]; P < .001) and the OSCE (r = 0.15 [95% CI, 0.10-0.20]; P < .001). Most of the candidates who failed the SOE passed the OSCE, and most of the candidates who failed the OSCE passed the SOE. Of the 1410 candidates, 77 (5.5%) failed the OSCE, 155 (11.0%) failed the SOE, and 25 (1.8%) failed both. Thus, 207 (14.7%) failed at least 1 component of the APPLIED Examination. Adding an OSCE to a board certification examination system is feasible. Preliminary evidence indicates that the OSCE measures aspects of candidate abilities distinct from those measured by other examinations used for initial board certification.

Connecting Purpose and Performance: Rethinking the Purpose of Maintenance of Certification.

American Boards of Medical Specialties have emphasized single point in time testing for summative assessment of cognitive expertise necessary for board certification. In 2016, the American Board of Anesthesiology introduced Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology (MOCA), a longitudinal assessment platform that provides diplomates formative feedback with continuous questions over time and adapts questions to areas of knowledge weaknesses over time. This paper describes the rationale, history, and early results of the American Board of Anesthesiology MOCA platform.

Development of an Objective Structured Clinical Examination as a Component of Assessment for Initial Board Certification in Anesthesiology.

With its first administration of an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) in 2018, the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) became the first US medical specialty certifying board to incorporate this type of assessment into its high-stakes certification examination system. The fundamental rationale for the ABA's introduction of the OSCE is to include an assessment that allows candidates for board certification to demonstrate what they actually "do" in domains relevant to clinical practice. Inherent in this rationale is that the OSCE will capture competencies not well assessed in the current written and oral examinations-competencies that will allow the ABA to judge whether a candidate meets the standards expected for board certification more properly. This special article describes the ABA's journey from initial conceptualization through first administration of the OSCE, including the format of the OSCE, the process for scenario development, the standardized patient program that supports OSCE administration, examiner training, scoring, and future assessment of reliability, validity, and impact of the OSCE. This information will be beneficial to both those involved in the initial certification process, such as residency graduate candidates and program directors, and others contemplating the use of high-stakes summative OSCE assessments.

Association Between Participation and Performance in MOCA Minute and Actions Against the Medical Licenses of Anesthesiologists.

BACKGROUND: In January 2016, as part of the Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology (MOCA) program, the American Board of Anesthesiology launched MOCA Minute, a web-based longitudinal assessment, to supplant the former cognitive examination. We investigated the association between participation and performance in MOCA Minute and disciplinary actions against medical licenses of anesthesiologists. METHODS: All anesthesiologists with time-limited certificates (ie, certified in 2000 or after) who were required to register for MOCA Minute in 2016 were followed up through December 31, 2016. The incidence of postcertification prejudicial license actions was compared between those who did and did not register and compared between registrants who did and did not meet the MOCA Minute performance standard. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of license actions was 1.2% (245/20,006) in anesthesiologists required to register for MOCA Minute. Nonregistration was associated with a higher incidence of license actions (hazard ratio, 2.93 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.15-4.00]). For the 18,534 (92.6%) who registered, later registration (after June 30, 2016) was associated with a higher incidence of license actions. In 2016, 16,308 (88.0%) anesthesiologists met the MOCA Minute performance standard. Of those not meeting the standard (n = 2226), most (n = 2093, 94.0%) failed because they did not complete the required 120 questions. Not meeting the standard was associated with a higher incidence of license actions (hazard ratio, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.36-2.72]). CONCLUSIONS: Both timely participation and meeting performance standard in MOCA Minute are associated with a lower likelihood of being disciplined by a state medical board.

The American Board of Anesthesiology's Standardized Oral Examination for Initial Board Certification.

The American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) has been administering an oral examination as part of its initial certification process since 1939. Among the 24 member boards of the American Board of Medical Specialties, 13 other boards also require passing an oral examination for physicians to become certified in their specialties. However, the methods used to develop, administer, and score these examinations have not been published. The purpose of this report is to describe the history and evolution of the anesthesiology Standardized Oral Examination, its current examination development and administration, the psychometric model and scoring, physician examiner training and auditing, and validity evidence. The many-facet Rasch model is the analytic method used to convert examiner ratings into scaled scores for candidates and takes into account how difficult grader examiners are and the difficulty of the examination tasks. Validity evidence of the oral examination includes that it measures aspects of clinical performance not accounted for by written certifying examinations, and that passing the oral examination is associated with a decreased risk of subsequent license actions against the anesthesiologist. Explaining the details of the Standardized Oral Examination provides transparency about this component of initial certification in anesthesiology.

Association between Performance in a Maintenance of Certification Program and Disciplinary Actions against the Medical Licenses of Anesthesiologists.

WHAT WE ALREADY KNOW ABOUT THIS TOPIC: WHAT THIS ARTICLE TELLS US THAT IS NEW: BACKGROUND:: In 2000, the American Board of Anesthesiology (Raleigh, North Carolina) began issuing time-limited certificates requiring renewal every 10 yr through a maintenance of certification program. This study investigated the association between performance in this program and disciplinary actions against medical licenses. METHODS: The incidence of postcertification prejudicial license actions was compared (1) between anesthesiologists certified between 1994 and 1999 (non-time-limited certificates not requiring maintenance of certification) and those certified between 2000 and 2005 (time-limited certificates requiring maintenance of certification); (2) within the non-time-limited cohort, between those who did and did not voluntarily participate in maintenance of certification; and (3) within the time-limited cohort, between those who did and did not complete maintenance of certification requirements within 10 yr. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of license actions was 3.8% (587 of 15,486). The incidence did not significantly differ after time-limited certificates were introduced (hazard ratio = 1.15; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.39; for non-time-limited cohort compared with time-limited cohort). In the non-time-limited cohort, 10% (n = 953) voluntarily participated in maintenance of certification. Maintenance of certification participation was associated with a lower incidence of license actions (hazard ratio = 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.94). In the time-limited cohort, 90% (n = 5,329) completed maintenance of certification requirements within 10 yr of certificate issuance. Not completing maintenance of certification requirements (n = 588) was associated with a higher incidence of license actions (hazard ratio = 4.61; 95% CI, 3.27 to 6.51). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that meeting maintenance of certification requirements is associated with a lower likelihood of being disciplined by a state licensing agency. The introduction of time-limited certificates in 2000 was not associated with a significant change in the rate of license actions.

Effect of the BASIC Examination on Knowledge Acquisition during Anesthesiology Residency.

BACKGROUND: The American Board of Anesthesiology recently introduced the BASIC Examination, a component of its new staged examinations for primary certification, typically offered to residents at the end of their first year of clinical anesthesiology training. This analysis tested the hypothesis that the introduction of the BASIC Examination was associated with an acceleration of knowledge acquisition during the residency training period, as measured by increments in annual In-Training Examination scores. METHODS: In-Training Examination performance was compared longitudinally among four resident cohorts (n = 6,488) before and after the introduction of the staged system using mixed-effects models that accounted for possible covariates. RESULTS: Compared with previous cohorts in the traditional examination system, the first resident cohort in the staged system had a greater improvement in In-Training Examination scores between the first and second years of clinical anesthesiology training (by an estimated 2.0 points in scaled score on a scale of 1 to 50 [95% CI, 1.7 to 2.3]). By their second year, they had achieved a score similar to that of third-year clinical anesthesiology residents in previous cohorts. The second cohort to enter the staged system had a greater improvement of the scores between the clinical base year and the first clinical anesthesiology year, compared with the previous cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the hypothesis that the introduction of the BASIC Examination is associated with accelerated knowledge acquisition in residency training and provides evidence for the value of the new staged system in promoting desired educational outcomes of anesthesiology training.

Effectiveness of Written and Oral Specialty Certification Examinations to Predict Actions against the Medical Licenses of Anesthesiologists.

BACKGROUND: The American Board of Anesthesiology administers written and oral examinations for its primary certification. This retrospective cohort study tested the hypothesis that the risk of a disciplinary action against a physician's medical license is lower in those who pass both examinations than those who pass only the written examination. METHODS: Physicians who entered anesthesiology training from 1971 to 2011 were followed up to 2014. License actions were ascertained via the Disciplinary Action Notification Service of the Federation of State Medical Boards. RESULTS: The incidence rate of license actions was relatively stable over the study period, with approximately 2 to 3 new cases per 1,000 person-years. In multivariable models, the risk of license actions was higher in men (hazard ratio = 1.88 [95% CI, 1.66 to 2.13]) and lower in international medical graduates (hazard ratio = 0.73 [95% CI, 0.66 to 0.81]). Compared with those passing both examinations on the first attempt, those passing neither examination (hazard ratio = 3.60 [95% CI, 3.14 to 4.13]) and those passing only the written examination (hazard ratio = 3.51 [95% CI, 2.87 to 4.29]) had an increased risk of receiving an action from a state medical board. The risk was no different between the latter two groups (P = 0.81), showing that passing the oral but not the written primary certification examination is associated with a decreased risk of subsequent license actions. For those with residency performance information available, having at least one unsatisfactory training record independently increased the risk of license actions. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the concept that an oral examination assesses domains important to physician performance that are not fully captured in a written examination.

Association between Participation in an Intensive Longitudinal Assessment Program and Performance on a Cognitive Examination in the Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology Program®.

BACKGROUND: As part of the Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology Program® (MOCA®), the American Board of Anesthesiology (Raleigh, North Carolina) developed the MOCA Minute program, a web-based intensive longitudinal assessment involving weekly questions with immediate feedback and links to learning resources. This observational study tested the hypothesis that individuals who participate in the MOCA Minute program perform better on the MOCA Cognitive Examination (CE) compared with those who do not participate. METHODS: Two separate cohorts of individuals eligible for July 2014 and January 2015 CEs were invited to participate in this pilot. The CE scores for each cohort were compared between those who did and did not participate, controlling for the factors known to affect performance. For the first cohort, examination performances for topics covered and not covered by the MOCA Minute were analyzed separately. RESULTS: Six hundred sixteen diplomates in July 2014 and 684 diplomates in January 2015 took the CE for the first time. In multiple regression analysis, those actively participating scored 9.9 points (95% CI, 0.8 to 18.9) and 9.3 points (95% CI, 2.3 to 16.3) higher when compared with those not enrolled, respectively. Compared to the group that did not enroll in MOCA Minute, those who enrolled but did not actively participate demonstrated no improvement in scores. MOCA Minute participation was associated with improvement in both questions covering topics included the MOCA Minute and questions not covering these topics. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides evidence that voluntary active participation in a program featuring frequent knowledge assessments accompanied by targeted learning resources is associated with improved performance on a high-stakes CE.

Feasibility of patient and peer surveys for Maintenance of Certification among diplomates of the American Board of Anesthesiology.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The initial developmental standards for Maintenance of Certification programs proposed by the American Board of Medical Specialties included the administration of patient and peer surveys by the diplomate every 5 years. The aim of this pilot study was to determine the feasibility of Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology Program (MOCA) patient and peer surveys in a selected group of American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) diplomates. DESIGN: The design was a pilot test of survey instruments-MOCA Patient Care Survey and MOCA Peer Survey. SETTING: The setting was the ABA, Raleigh, NC. SUBJECTS: The subjects were ABA-certified anesthesiologists who were active examiners for the primary certification oral examination as of January 2013. MEASUREMENTS: Fifty-one participating physicians in the patient survey group distributed brochures, which included a link to the MOCA Patient Care Survey, to up to 100 consecutive patients at the point of care. Fifty-one participating physicians in the peer survey group distributed invitations to MOCA Peer Survey via e-mail to 20 peers in a variety of roles. Participants developed and evaluated a practice improvement plan based on survey results. Participants were also surveyed on their opinions on the feasibility of implementing the piloted survey instrument in their practices. MAIN RESULTS: Response rates for the patient care and the peer surveys were 15% and 75%, respectively. Both surveys indicated a high level of satisfaction with the diplomates; approximately two-thirds of physicians could not identify practice areas in need of improvement. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that threats to the validity of these surveys include distribution bias for peer surveys and response bias for patient surveys and that surveys often do not provide actionable information useful for practice improvement. Alternative approaches, such as including anesthesiologists within an integrated institutional evaluation system, could be explored to maximize the benefits of physician assessments provided by peers and patients.

Predictors of performance on the Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology Program® (MOCA®) examination.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the independent factors associated with performance on the Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology Program (MOCA) examination. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: The American Board of Anesthesiology, Raleigh, NC. SUBJECTS: The American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) diplomates who were certified between 2000 and 2006 and had taken the MOCA examination at least once by July 2013. MEASUREMENTS: MOCA examination score for the first attempt. MAIN RESULTS: Independent positive predictors for MOCA examination score in multiple regression analysis included passing the ABA Part 1 and Part 2 certification examinations on the first attempt and male sex, whereas negative predictors included history of action(s) taken against any medical license, taking the examination later in the MOCA cycle and older age at primary certification. CONCLUSIONS: Several factors in addition to performance on the written examination for primary certification (Part 1 Examination) are independently associated with performance on the MOCA examination. Because many of these factors are not modifiable, those diplomates who possess unfavorable risk factors should pay special attention to engaging in continuing learning to prepare for the MOCA examination.

Growing healthy kids: a community garden-based obesity prevention program.

BACKGROUND: Childhood obesity has increased dramatically in the past 3 decades, particularly among children aged 2-5 years. In this group, Latino children are among those with the highest prevalence of obesity. PURPOSE: This paper describes a pilot study to evaluate a community intervention, known as the Growing Healthy Kids Program (GHK), to prevent childhood obesity among low-income families in a Southern state. METHODS: The intervention included a weekly gardening session, a 7-week cooking and nutrition workshop, and social events for parents and children. Matched pre- and post-program height and weight data were collected for 95 children aged 2-15 years. Children's BMI was determined. Also, families reported on the availability and consumption of fruits and vegetables at the beginning and the end of the family's participation in the GHK program. Data were collected in 2008-2010 and analyzed in 2011. RESULTS: About 60% of participants who enrolled in the program were Latino families (n=60 families/120 children). By the end of their participation in the program, 17% (n=6, p<0.004) of obese or overweight children had improved their BMI classification and 100% of the children with a BMI classification of normal had maintained that BMI classification. According to parental reports, there was an increase of 146% (p<0.001) in the availability of fruits and vegetables and an increase in the consumption of fruits (28%; p<0.001) and vegetables (33%; p<0.001) among children of families participating in the GHK program. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this pilot study are consistent with previous studies reporting an increase in availability and consumption of fruits and vegetables among families participating in community gardens. Although there are limitations because this is a pilot study, this strategy seems to be promising for addressing childhood obesity, particularly among low-income Latino immigrant families.