Abstract
Japanese Society of Clinical Neurophysiology (JSCN) operates board certifications for clinical neurophysiologist and clinical neurophysiology technologist, both for the electroencephalography (EEG) and electromyography/nerve conduction (EMG/NCS) sections, respectively. The specialty committee of JSCN proposed the curriculum for clinical neurophysiology training that defined attainment targets regarding knowledge and skills in 2017. The curriculum was composed of the common (basic) section, EEG section, and EMG/NCS section. To test its validity, we conducted questionnaire survey asking board-certified clinical neurophysiologists (medical doctors) and clinical neurophysiology technologists (mostly clinical laboratory technicians) about the appropriateness of the grade regarding the attainment of individual items of the curriculum. As results, 70 answers from doctors and 61 answers from technologists were obtained. In general, the dissociation between the grade proposed by the committee and that considered appropriate through the questionnaire was larger for the curriculum for technologists in EEG and EMG/NCS sections, but was larger for that for medical doctors in the basic section. When less than 50% of answers agreed with the grade proposed by the committee, the grading was reconsidered. This occurred for six items in the curriculum for technologists. Finally, the grade was changed for four out of the six items, 2 for the EEG section and 2 for the EMG/NCS section. These included indication for EEG, EEG changes by vigilance or aging, indication for NCS, and indication for repetitive nerve stimulation. For all 4 items, the grade was raised from grade B (can explain the outline) to grade A (can explain the full details). No change was made to the curriculum for medical doctors. Consequently, “the curriculum for clinical neurophysiology training” was finalized and approved by the executive board of JSCN in 2020. The established curriculum was open on the JSCN website, and is being required as the eligibility for the admission to the board-examination for medical doctors from 2024. The curriculum for specialty training is usually determined by members in a pertinent committee of a society. We aimed to validate it through an extensive questionnaire to board-certified doctors and technologists. As far as we searched, we could not find similar attempts, at least in Japan. Such a method would be useful for increasing the reliability of the curriculum that would meet the requirement for the national health.
