Tracking EEG technologist and reader credentials for accreditation

Accounts are not credentials

The roster question sounds administrative until a surveyor asks it: who performs and interprets studies here, and what are their credentials? A list of software user accounts does not answer it. Accounts prove system access; a credential roster proves qualification, and the two must never be conflated in an evidence package.

Accreditation expectations across ABRET's laboratory standards and NAEC's center criteria (see the personnel and qualification areas of the current published editions) make credentialed staffing a first-class topic. The evidence is a roster with dates.

Effective-dated, with visible expiry

A credential is a claim with a lifespan: granted on a date, expiring on a date. A roster that shows each person's credentials with effective and expiration dates, and flags what is expiring or expired as of the print date, is readable evidence. A roster that lists letters after names with no dates is a formatting exercise.

Scope belongs on the record

Reading scope is the sharpest example. A center that reads pediatric studies routes them to physicians with pediatric reading privileges; the defensible version of that sentence is a recorded privilege on the roster, not a tag in a dropdown. The same recorded scope then drives the routing warnings in daily work, so the roster and the workflow cannot quietly disagree.

People also leave. A departed reader's historical reads keep their attribution; the identity is retired, never deleted, because the evidence chain for last year's studies still points at them.