EDITORIAL
On Challenging the American Board of Prosthodontics (ABP) Examination
I have just returned from the first (ever) August ABP examination. The Board decided to hold an additional examination this year due to the high volume of candidates desiring to challenge the ABP exam—that’s great news for the Specialty of Prosthodontics! In fact, there was even a waiting list to challenge the exams on THIS CYCLE! The exam was held in Chicago August 1–3; 38 candidates were examined on 61 Section B exams, and 24 candidates were examined on Section C exams. While I am confident that most of the candidates will be successful in their exams, a few “fatal errors” continue to emerge in the candidate’s presentations, at least in the brief time I’ve been an examiner. The greatest error I see is that individuals bring patient treatments to the ABP exam without having had anyone look at or evaluate them prior to presenting! Now come on, everyone challenging the exam has been trained by one or more Board-Certified Prosthodontist (that’d be your graduate program director), or they at least KNOW someone who has challenged the ABP exam. I am confident that any Diplomate of the ABP would be more than willing to assist a colleague in case selection, review the materials required for the exam, and give positive feedback on their progress in patient care and final outcomes. In preparing for the oral examination, candidates must reveal their understanding of the fundamental knowledge in prosthodontics to support the treatment they have provided. And, if for some reason, you didn’t get along well with your program director, or don’t have access to a Diplomate of the ABP, you should contact Dr. Ron Woody at Baylor (Ron’s semiretired now, is a former President of the ABP, and has lots of free time on his hands to help you) for assistance. The second major error I saw is in the lack of understanding of the principles of removable (partial) dental prostheses (RDP) design and function. This was a striking observation in the recent examination process. What’s happened in our training programs? Are there not sufficient numbers of partially edentulous patients to adequately train our residents in proper RDP design principles? Have we incorporated dental implant therapy so well into the training programs that RDPs have been declining in use? If that’s the case, perhaps it’s time for our Graduate Program Directors to have a serious discussion on this issue, and consider removing RDPs from the Commission on Dental Accreditation (CODA) Standards in Graduate Prosthodontics. In West Virginia, because of the nature of our population needs, we’ll continue to teach RDPs for many years to come. Another major error I saw was in the lack of providing balancing articulation for stabilization of removable prostheses.
Whether you believe in the precepts of balanced articulation in removable prosthodontics, the ABP fully expects you to DEMONSTRATE that you can provide balanced articulation in your final prostheses—that also mandates that balanced articulation is present on your articulated final casts! OCCLUSION is IMPORTANT in this examination process! While taking the ABP exam is challenging for the candidates, it’s equally challenging for the examiners, with long hours of calibration, examinations, postexam discussions, and preparation for the next exam. To quote Dr. Jonathan Wiens, President of the ABP, “It is always amazing to me that, as a group of likeminded individuals we expect some diversity, yet there is also a high degree of respect for the other person’s knowledge. The content of the ABP examination is based upon the Standards for Advanced Specialty Education Programs in Prosthodontics. A lot has been said about how evidence-based dentistry should guide or support our examination process, with which I totally agree. However, being primarily in private practice, you learn to appreciate that ‘the lack of evidence does not mean there is no lack of effect.’ This is the strength of the Board, as its diversity, cumulative knowledge, and clinical observations provide a consensus during our deliberations. And, it is both fair and effective as long as it is calibrated (we hold calibration sessions several times a year).” One of the frustrations that the Board routinely experiences is related to candidates cancelling their exams at the last minute. In August, four candidates withdrew with less than a week remaining, and one candidate withdrew from two parts after arriving in Chicago. What this means is that those who withdraw are holding a spot, thus preventing those seven candidates on the waiting list from being able to challenge the exam until the next cycle. The Board will address this late cancellation issue in the very near future. So, colleagues, the bottom line is—the ABP exam is an incredibly important aspect of our Specialty. It continues to evolve to meet the ever-changing demands of our Specialty, and the evolving CODA standards. If you have NOT elected to challenge the ABP exam, please reconsider. As one who challenged the examination process 12 years after I completed my graduate training, I can attest that it’s never too late! Prosthodontics, and what we learn from it, is a journey, not a destination—we’re all life-long learners, and the ABP exam is just one stop along the way. I hope to see YOU at a future ABP examination!
C 2013 by the American College of Prosthodontists Journal of Prosthodontics 22 (2013) 515
David A. Felton, DDS, MS, FACP Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Prosthodontics
515
On Challenging the American Board of Prosthodontics (ABP) Examination
I have just returned from the first (ever) August ABP examination. The Board decided to hold an additional examination this year due to the high volume of candidates desiring to challenge the ABP exam—that’s great news for the Specialty of Prosthodontics! In fact, there was even a waiting list to challenge the exams on THIS CYCLE! The exam was held in Chicago August 1–3; 38 candidates were examined on 61 Section B exams, and 24 candidates were examined on Section C exams. While I am confident that most of the candidates will be successful in their exams, a few “fatal errors” continue to emerge in the candidate’s presentations, at least in the brief time I’ve been an examiner. The greatest error I see is that individuals bring patient treatments to the ABP exam without having had anyone look at or evaluate them prior to presenting! Now come on, everyone challenging the exam has been trained by one or more Board-Certified Prosthodontist (that’d be your graduate program director), or they at least KNOW someone who has challenged the ABP exam. I am confident that any Diplomate of the ABP would be more than willing to assist a colleague in case selection, review the materials required for the exam, and give positive feedback on their progress in patient care and final outcomes. In preparing for the oral examination, candidates must reveal their understanding of the fundamental knowledge in prosthodontics to support the treatment they have provided. And, if for some reason, you didn’t get along well with your program director, or don’t have access to a Diplomate of the ABP, you should contact Dr. Ron Woody at Baylor (Ron’s semiretired now, is a former President of the ABP, and has lots of free time on his hands to help you) for assistance. The second major error I saw is in the lack of understanding of the principles of removable (partial) dental prostheses (RDP) design and function. This was a striking observation in the recent examination process. What’s happened in our training programs? Are there not sufficient numbers of partially edentulous patients to adequately train our residents in proper RDP design principles? Have we incorporated dental implant therapy so well into the training programs that RDPs have been declining in use? If that’s the case, perhaps it’s time for our Graduate Program Directors to have a serious discussion on this issue, and consider removing RDPs from the Commission on Dental Accreditation (CODA) Standards in Graduate Prosthodontics. In West Virginia, because of the nature of our population needs, we’ll continue to teach RDPs for many years to come. Another major error I saw was in the lack of providing balancing articulation for stabilization of removable prostheses.
Whether you believe in the precepts of balanced articulation in removable prosthodontics, the ABP fully expects you to DEMONSTRATE that you can provide balanced articulation in your final prostheses—that also mandates that balanced articulation is present on your articulated final casts! OCCLUSION is IMPORTANT in this examination process! While taking the ABP exam is challenging for the candidates, it’s equally challenging for the examiners, with long hours of calibration, examinations, postexam discussions, and preparation for the next exam. To quote Dr. Jonathan Wiens, President of the ABP, “It is always amazing to me that, as a group of likeminded individuals we expect some diversity, yet there is also a high degree of respect for the other person’s knowledge. The content of the ABP examination is based upon the Standards for Advanced Specialty Education Programs in Prosthodontics. A lot has been said about how evidence-based dentistry should guide or support our examination process, with which I totally agree. However, being primarily in private practice, you learn to appreciate that ‘the lack of evidence does not mean there is no lack of effect.’ This is the strength of the Board, as its diversity, cumulative knowledge, and clinical observations provide a consensus during our deliberations. And, it is both fair and effective as long as it is calibrated (we hold calibration sessions several times a year).” One of the frustrations that the Board routinely experiences is related to candidates cancelling their exams at the last minute. In August, four candidates withdrew with less than a week remaining, and one candidate withdrew from two parts after arriving in Chicago. What this means is that those who withdraw are holding a spot, thus preventing those seven candidates on the waiting list from being able to challenge the exam until the next cycle. The Board will address this late cancellation issue in the very near future. So, colleagues, the bottom line is—the ABP exam is an incredibly important aspect of our Specialty. It continues to evolve to meet the ever-changing demands of our Specialty, and the evolving CODA standards. If you have NOT elected to challenge the ABP exam, please reconsider. As one who challenged the examination process 12 years after I completed my graduate training, I can attest that it’s never too late! Prosthodontics, and what we learn from it, is a journey, not a destination—we’re all life-long learners, and the ABP exam is just one stop along the way. I hope to see YOU at a future ABP examination!
C 2013 by the American College of Prosthodontists Journal of Prosthodontics 22 (2013) 515
David A. Felton, DDS, MS, FACP Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Prosthodontics
515
