Back to Authors

Sabharwal, Sunil

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3736-5121

Mayo Clinic

Harvard University

Citations 2

Current practice focus trends in physical medicine and rehabilitation
Kinney, Carolyn L. , Pruitt, David W. , Francisco, Gerard E. , Raddatz, Mikaela M. , Sabharwal, Sunil , Kinney, Carolyn , Pruitt, David W

PM&R | December 20, 2023 | Volume: 16 | Issue: 7 | Pages: 738-744

10.1002/pmrj.13119 Get It

Abstract Background Physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) is a diverse specialty, growing and evolving over a variety of subspecialty and practice focus areas. Accurate data regarding practice patterns of physiatrists are essential for updating requirements in training and certification, particularly as the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education begins its process to update of the PM&R core residency training requirements. This study analyzes practice trends for nearly 98% of physiatrists in active practice, the largest study to date. Objective To update current demographics of physicians specializing in PM&R, including current areas of practice focus, to analyze the alignment of practice focus with subspecialty certification, and to determine the extent that electromyography is a component of current physiatric practice. Design Retrospective analysis of deidentified responses from American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (ABPMR) board‐certified PM&R physicians (diplomates) on annual enrollment in the ABPMR Continuing Certification program. Participants A total of 9543 ABPMR diplomates. Main Outcome Measures Demographics – age, gender, years in practice, practice setting(s) and area(s). Practice focus, subspecialty certifications. Results The majority of practicing physiatrists are men (62%) although the percentage of women in the field is growing (38%). Nearly 80% of physiatrists report more than one practice focus area, with pain medicine and sports medicine/musculoskeletal practices most commonly reported. Conclusions This study confirms the growth trends in PM&R in pain and sports medicine but also highlights the substantial number of physiatrists focusing their practices in areas related to neurorehabilitation and medical rehabilitation. The large majority of physiatrists incorporate multiple focus areas into their practices. Electromyography is a focus for a declining percentage of practicing physiatrists.
Current status and trends in subspecialty certification in physical medicine and rehabilitation
Sabharwal, Sunil , Kinney, Carolyn L. , Raddatz, Mikaela M. , Driscoll, Sherilyn W. , Francisco, Gerard E. , Robinson, Lawrence R. , Geis, Carolyn, Micheo, William , Robinson, Lawrence R , Kinney, Carolyn

PM&R | January 17, 2022 | Volume: 15 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 212-221

10.1002/pmrj.12763 Get It

AbstractBackgroundThere is a need to better understand the overall state of sub‐specialization in physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R).ObjectiveTo examine the status and trends in subspecialty certification for each of the seven subspecialties approved for American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (ABPMR) diplomates.Design/SettingRetrospective analysis of deidentified information from the ABPMR database.ParticipantsPhysicians certified by ABPMR through 2019.InterventionsNot applicable.Main Outcome MeasuresFor each subspecialty, we examined: (1) the number of certificates issued to ABPMR diplomates; (2) the recertification rate; (3) the yearly trends for total active, new, and expired certificates; and (4) for ABPMR‐administered subspecialties, recertification rates for those entering the subspecialty through fellowship completion versus a “grandfathered” practice pathway.ResultsOf 11,421 ABPMR diplomates in the United States in 2019, a total of 3560 (31.2%) had 3985 active subspecialty certificates. Pain Medicine (PM) was the most common subspecialty certification (15.5% of all ABPMR diplomates) followed by Sports Medicine (SM, 6.6%), Brain Injury Medicine (BIM, 4.8%), Spinal Cord Injury Medicine (SCIM, 4.2%), Pediatric Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM, 2.5%), Neuromuscular Medicine (NMM, 0.7%), and Hospice and Palliative Medicine (HPM, 0.5%). For diplomates with more than one subspecialty certification, PM and SM was the most frequent combination. Both the recertification rate and the end of practice track eligibility influenced certification trends differently for individual subspecialties. The average number of new certificates added annually for every subspecialty was higher before than after the temporary practice track‐based eligibility ended; the difference was statistically significant (p < .05) for SCIM, PM, SM, and NMM. The recertification rate for all subspecialties combined was 73.4%. For the subspecialties (SCIM, PRM) for which these data were available, fellowship candidates had higher recertification rates than those grandfathered through a practice track.ConclusionThis report informs stakeholders about the state and evolution of subspecialty certification in PM&R over time.