This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mandelbaum, L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mandelbaum, L. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Health Occupations Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Periodic Competency Review

An Assessment and Policy Model

Albers School of Business, Seattle University

Periodic review ofprofessional competence or performance is on the public agenda as a response to rising malpractice suits, iatrogenic morbidity, and mortality resulting directly from professional incompetence, and the inadequacy of current licensing and discipline systems. This article reviews several continuing competency programs, such as mandatory education, as well as recent experiments in selective performance evaluation. The evaluation literature suggests that mandatory continuing education and most peer review programs are not sufficiently related to improvement ofperformance. An Ontario experiment provides useful data and insight about a positive reinforcement (nonpunitive) independent peer review process. Policymakers should consider, as an alternative to mandatory continuing education, directing professional associations, professional schools, and regulatory boards to design cost effective review procedures which selectively monitor performance.

Evaluation & the Health Professions, Vol. 10, No. 3, 342-358 (1987)
DOI: 10.1177/016327878701000306


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?