Correspondence  |   June 2019
Maintenance of Certification: Comment
Author Notes
  • Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (D.J.Culley). dculley@bwh.harvard.edu
  • (Accepted for publication March 7, 2019.)
    (Accepted for publication March 7, 2019.)×
Article Information
Correspondence
Correspondence   |   June 2019
Maintenance of Certification: Comment
Anesthesiology 6 2019, Vol.130, 1091-1092. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000002723
Anesthesiology 6 2019, Vol.130, 1091-1092. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000002723
We read with great interest the editorial “Maintenance of Certification: Has MOC Gone Amok?” by Nelson and Butterworth, which was published in the October 2018 issue of Anesthesiology, commenting on our recent publication examining the relationship between participation and performance in the Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology program and medical license actions against anesthesiologists.1  As evidenced by this and several other publications,2–6  the American Board of Anesthesiology (Raleigh, North Carolina) is committed to a rigorous and transparent evaluation of Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology.
The carefully crafted title asks a rhetorical question using the hyperbolic word “amok,” effectively calling into question the purpose and vision of Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology. We take seriously and welcome this conversation within the anesthesiology community. Although a full discussion on the purpose and vision of Maintenance of Certification in Anesthesiology is beyond the scope of a letter to the editor, we will address this issue succinctly at the conclusion of this letter.