Chen · Annals of plastic surgery 2024 · descriptive documentary review · n=4 boards

Evaluating Board Certification Within the Aesthetic Marketplace.

Cited 1 times in the scientific literature.

Level 5 - mechanism / opinion, no new human data

Level 5 by design analogy; descriptive non-clinical comparison of organizational credentialing criteria.

PubMed 39230296 · doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000004056 · record verified 2026-08-29

What was done

The authors identified four certifying boards relevant to aesthetic surgery via a Google search for "board of plastic surgery": the American Board of Plastic Surgery (ABPS), American Board of Cosmetic Surgery (ABCS), American Board of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (ABFPRS), and American Board of Facial Cosmetic Surgery (ABFCS). Requirements for initial certification and maintenance of certification were collected and compared using public information from each board's official website.

What was found

No quantitative statistical outcomes were reported. Qualitatively: - ABPS requires an ACGME-accredited plastic surgery residency, written and oral examinations with a case collection, and continuing certification maintenance; it is the only member board of the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS). - ABCS and ABFCS require an American Academy of Cosmetic Surgery fellowship and written/oral examinations, but neither requires a case collection or continuing certification. - ABFPRS requires completion of either an ACGME-accredited otolaryngology or plastic surgery residency, written and oral examinations, a case log, and continuing certification for surgeons certified in 2001 or later.

Why it matters

Patients seeking aesthetic surgery pay out of pocket and must independently evaluate surgeon qualifications. Understanding the structural differences across similarly named boards clarifies what training, peer case review, and ongoing maintenance of certification different credentials actually guarantee.

Limits

The analysis is restricted to four boards identified through a single search engine query and relies entirely on website self-reporting. The study did not measure clinical outcomes, complication rates, malpractice claims, or actual surgical competency associated with diplomates of each board.

Cited by