Page 5 - Vol0_No05_2018

James O. Wear: Certification in the United States, Canada and Asia

Around 2008, there was a growing interest in certifi- made available in both countries on a single date and time
cation in Canada as younger engineers entered the pro- each year, early in November. All policies and procedures
fession and the need for skilled staff continued to grow. are harmonized, and the Canadian Board assists the US
Members of the former Canadian Board were asked by Board in the generation of new written and oral exam
the Canadian Medical and Biological Engineering Society questions. Members of the two Boards discuss their
(CMBES) to restart a Canadian certification process and work on a regular basis, and the Chairs of each Board sit
bring it up-to-date. It was apparent that with the small on the HTCC.
number of certification applicants, it would be difficult to The harmonized process was established in 2010 and
launch and sustain a self-supporting certification process. remains in place. There has been good communication
Since there are many similarities in the practice of clinical between each Board, and a generally high level of support
engineering between Canada and the United States, they for this harmonized process.
decided to approach the US Board about the possibility of
sharing aspects of the enhanced US exam process. CoMMiSSion foR the AdvAnCeMent
Adding further credibility to the process, The US Board of heAlthCARe teChnology
of Examiners is accountable to the Health Technology MAnAgeMent in ASiA (CAhtMA)
Certification Commission, which oversees the work of CAHTMA was initiated in 2005 with the endorsement
the Board and ultimately decides on recommendations of the Asian Hospital Federation. The Asian Hospital
10
from the Board to certify individuals. Federation (AHF) is an international non-governmental
Discussions between the Canadian and US Boards organization, supported by members from 14 countries
went well with good support and encouragement from in the Asia Pacific Region. CAHTMA is a member of the
US colleagues. The main issue of divergence of practice International Federation of Medical and Biological Engi-
between Canadian and US clinical engineers relates to neering (IFMBE) and initially had WHO advisers. It was
the country specific codes, regulations and standards, established to provide a platform for health care profes-
an important but relatively small part of the written sionals to discuss and exchange ideas on health care
exam. In discussion, it was agreed that members of the technologies and practices. Central to these objectives are
Canadian Board would review the US written exam, to the promotion of best technology management practices,
identify those questions requiring specific knowledge of the certification of clinical engineering practitioners and
US codes, standards and regulations. Out of a full exam healthcare professionals and the dissemination of appropri-
of 150 multiple-choice questions, the total number of ate management tools through seminars and workshops.
exempted questions is typically no more than 30. These
CAHTMA has certified a few clinical practitioners, but
questions are not counted for Canadian examinees and
there has been no major need for certification in Malaysia
the same percentage pass mark is used. To compensate
since it has not been required. When CAHTMA started
for the lack of written exam questions on Canadian codes,
certification, the government was planning legislation to
standards and regulations, it was decided to put an ad-
require certification for maintenance of medical equip-
ditional (fourth) question into the Canadian oral exam
ment. Technicians are certified as a level one clinical prac-
process, specifically on these topics. The Canadian Board
titioner with a written exam and experience which is like
agreed to develop such a question using the same process
the ICC BMET. Engineers are certified as level two clinical
as the US Board. In this way, Canadian candidates are
practitioners with a written exam and an oral exam and
examined through a slightly different but parallel process
experience which is similar to the HTCC CCE. In order to
to their US counterparts.
encourage more engineers to become certified, CAHTMA
It was agreed that Canadian applicants would register is going to use the process of certifying individuals based
and be administered by the Secretariat to the US Board, on credentials similar to what has been with the initial
to avoid setting up a parallel office in Canada. Sites are program in the US and Taiwan.
available in Canada to sit for the written exam, which is

19 J Global Clinical Engineering Special Issue 1: 15-22; 2018