Moss James P
Orthodontics Department, Royal London Hospital, London, UK.
Prog Orthod. 2006;7(1):16-23.
There has been a proliferation of Orthodontic Boards across the world but there is no uniformity in standards, purposes or in the type of examination. In order to promote discussion at the International Orthodontic Congress in Paris in September 2005 a questionnaire was sent out to 80 Orthodontic Societies on the World Federation of Orthodontists list. There was a limited response to the questionnaire but the results are described in this paper. It illustrated that there were mainly two types of Board, mandatory ones that acted to license the Orthodontist in that country on the Specialist register and voluntary ones where the orthodontist demonstrates his excellence. The paper describes the answers to the various questions asked on the purpose, eligibility and type of examination of the Boards. They were also asked about the feasibility of an International Board. This was rejected as an option but an affiliation of Boards was recommended.
世界各地正畸委员会的数量激增，但在标准、目的或考试类型方面却缺乏统一性。为了推动在2005年9月于巴黎召开的国际正畸大会上进行讨论，向世界正畸医师联合会名单上的80个正畸学会发送了一份调查问卷。对该问卷的回复有限，但本文描述了调查结果。结果表明，主要有两种类型的委员会，一种是强制性的，负责在该国专科医生登记册上为正畸医师颁发执照；另一种是自愿性的，正畸医师可借此展示其卓越水平。本文描述了针对委员会的目的、资格和考试类型所提各种问题的答案。还询问了他们关于国际委员会的可行性。这一选项被否决了，但建议各委员会建立联系。
