To the Editor:

Important changes are taking place in the care required by cardiology patients, regardless of whether it is provided in outpatient clinics, regional hospitals or a tertiary hospital. We are all aware of the fact that addressing the new health care needs will require a greater number of professionals, but that an acceptable level of quality must be maintained.

Among the measures that are being introduced, we should highlight the adaptation of teaching programs, the definition of the possible training alternatives, the revision of the validations of degrees earned in other countries and the importation of specialists. It is much more difficult to define the limits of each type of cardiologist, as well as the boundaries shared with other specialties and our role in the multidisciplinary teams required by certain diseases and organizations.

As clinical cardiologists, we consider that our patient care activity is frequently undervalued and, thus, the training we need to carry it out is underestimated. The present need for cardiologists with a clinical profile may produce a situation in which scientific-formative considerations fail to play a decisive role in planning and decision-making, and which fosters an interest in having more specialists to relieve health care pressures, regardless of their skills.

The Spanish Society of Cardiology is not indifferent: it is stimulating the debate about the future of cardiology through the European Conference held in Madrid, in the Revista Española de Cardiología itself, with a special article,1 and in our national congress. Along these lines, the European Society of Cardiology has introduced the European Core Curriculum in "general" cardiology, in an attempt to standardize the training of European cardiologists. The debate on the future of cardiology interests all of us and is worthy of every effort and of all the diffusion we can give it.