Transcript Document

Accreditation 101Understanding the Basics
Authors: George Fox and Mya Warken
Date: September 20, 2012
Conflict of Interest
• George Fox
Within the past 5 years, I have received
honoraria (speaker, advisory board) and/or
research support from the following
pharmaceutical companies:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Actelion
Astra-Zeneca
Boehringer Ingelheim
Glaxo Smith Kline
InterMune
Nycomed
• Mya Warken
– I have no conflicts of interest to disclose
7/21/2015
2
Introductions
• George Fox
– Chair, Royal College CPD Accreditation
Committee
• Mya Warken
– Senior CPD Accreditation Specialist
7/21/2015
3
Learning Objectives
By the end of this session participants will be able
to:
Explain the criteria established to determine if
the developing organization meets the definition
of a physician organization;
Discuss the minimally acceptable educational and
ethical standards all programs must meet to be
approved as an accredited group learning activity
(Section 1);
Identify at least one area for improvement to the
review process for their organization.
7/21/2015
4
What are you looking for?
7/21/2015
5
The Maintenance of Certification Program
Section
Details
Section 1-Accredited Group
Learning Activities
•Accredited rounds, journal clubs, small group
learning
• Accredited conferences, workshops,
seminars (face-to-face and web based)
Section 2: Self-learning
• Planned Learning
• Scanning
• Systems Learning
Section 3: Assessment
•Knowledge Assessment (Accredited SelfAssessment Programs)
•Performance Assessment (Accredited
Simulation Activities)
7/21/2015
6
Accredited CPD Providers
 31 National Specialty Societies
 17 Canadian University Offices of Continuing
Medical Education (CME)
 3 Accredited Simulation Programs
 Limited Providers:
 Fédération des médecins spécialistes du Québec
 Leadership and Professional Development within the
Canadian Medical Association
 The Canadian Medical Protective Association
“...you are not alone!”
7/21/2015
7
Accredited CPD Providers – Your role
Accredited CPD Providers review programs that
have been developed by physician organizations, or
are co-developed with non-physician organizations:
activities that meet the standards for group learning
under Section 1; includes conferences, courses, and
workshops
self-assessment activities under Section 3; includes
knowledge and performance assessment (self-assessment
programs or simulation based assessment)
7/21/2015
8
Reviewing an Application for Section 1
 Application submitted by the physician
organization and signed by the Chair of the
planning committee
 Attachments:
– Needs Assessment results
– Detailed Program/Course Schedule (including
sponsorship recognition)
– Evaluation Form/Tool
– Budget
– Documentation re: Ethical Standards
Others?
7/21/2015
9
Reviewing an Application for Section 1
Who
Who Can
Can Review
Review an
an Application
Application for
for Section
Section 11
 Application submitted by the physician
organization
andProviders
signed by the Chair of the
Accredited
planning committee
What is
is the
the Basis
Basis of
of the
the Accreditation
Application toProcess
be an
What
 Attachments:
Accredited
CPD Provider
hnn.m
n
– Needs
Assessment
A structure
andresults
process which enables the
– Detailed
Program/Course
Schedule
(including
same criteria
as for Section
1 review
(+)
sponsorship
Standardrecognition)
Operating Procedures to support
the structure
and process
– Evaluation
Form/Tool
– Policies
– Budget
– Procedures
– Documentation re: Ethical Standards
– Documentation, Records
Others?
Administrative structure and resources to
support the SOPs
7/21/2015
10
Reviewing an Application for Section 1
Section 1 Requirements:
 Part A: Administrative Standards (physician
organization)
 Part B: Educational Standards
 Part C: Ethical Standards
7/21/2015
11
Part A– Physician Organization
A not-for-profit group of health professionals
with a formal governance structure,
accountable to and serving, among others, its
specialist physician members through:
* Continuing professional development;
* Provision of health care; and/or
* Research
7/21/2015
12
Exercise and Discussion
Using the definition provided, review the
organization examples to determine if they
meet the Royal College definition of
“physician organization”.
7/21/2015
13
Part B: Section 1-Mandatory Educational
Standards
1. Program planned to address the needs of the
target audience
2. Learning objectives communicated to audience
3. A least 25% interactive learning time
4. Evaluation of:
– learning objectives
– learning outcomes
7/21/2015
14
Addressing needs
1. Program planned to address the needs of the
target audience
– The target audience is clearly identified;
– The planning committee is representative of
the target audience;
– A needs assessment is done for the identified
target audience.
7/21/2015
15
Learning objectives
2. Learning objectives communicated to audience
–
Identified needs are used to create learning objectives
for:
•
•
–
Learning objectives are communicated to participants in
advance
•
–
Overall program
Individual sessions within the program
Within the program or other circulated materials
Learning objectives written to inform participants what
information or skill(s) they will acquire by participating
in the activity
•
•
“At the end of this session participants will…”
Avoid “appreciate, know, learn, understand” etc.
7/21/2015
16
Interactivity
3. At least 25% interactive learning time
– Keeping participants engaged!
• Plenary sessions, small group sessions, roundtables,
workshops, break-out sessions, debates
– Online programs MUST include interaction
between participants and faculty
– Opportunities for interaction should be
communicated in the program
– Delivery method should be reflected in the
learning objectives
7/21/2015
17
Evaluation
4. Evaluation of:
– Learning objectives
– Learning outcomes
– Adherence to ethical guidelines (conflict
of interest/bias)
• Is there an opportunity to provide details
about perceived bias and management
strategy?
– Opportunities for interactive learning
7/21/2015
18
Part C: Section 1-Mandatory Ethical
Standards
CMA Guidelines for Physicians in Interactions
with Industry.
Interpreted to apply to accredited group learning
activities (they were developed for individuals)
The Code of Ethics for parties in Continuing
Medical Education of the Conseil québécois de
développement professionnel continu des
médecins (Quebec).
7/21/2015
19
Part C: Section 1-Mandatory Ethical
Standards
CMA Guidelines for Physicians in Interactions
with Industry.
Interpreted to apply to accredited group learning
activities (they were developed for individuals)
The Code of Ethics for parties in Continuing
Medical Education of the Conseil québécois de
développement professionnel continu des
médecins (Quebec).
7/21/2015
20
Ethical Standards (cont’d)
1. Physician organization controls:
a) topic(s)
b) content
c) speakers selected
2. Content is scientifically valid and balanced (and not promotional)
3. Conflict of interest declarations received from everyone who
influenced content and communicated to participants.
4. Funding provided via educational grants payable to the physician
organization
5. There are no product advertisements and sponsorship is
appropriately recognized
6. Use of generic names (or both generic and trade names, must
be consistent)
7/21/2015
21
Considerations for web-based activities
• In addition to Section 1 face-to-face group
learning standards:
– Web-based group learning activities must
provide an opportunity for interaction between
participants and faculty;
– Participants must ‘log on’ to the interactive
component;
– Certificates of participation provided after
participants have ‘logged on’ to the interactive
component.
7/21/2015
22
Remember…
• “Satellite symposia” (unaccredited group
learning activities) must:
– Not conflict with or compete with accredited
group learning activities
– Not be listed or included within conference
brochures or schedules
• Effective July 1, 2012 “tagging” is prohibited
– The linking or alignment of a sponsor’s name
to a specific educational session within an
accredited group learning activity
7/21/2015
23
Post-Review Responsibilities
Inform the applicant of the status of their
application (approved, not-approved, needs
improvement).
If improvement is required, help counsel the
applicant until their program meets the
standards (if possible).
Notify the Royal College (via email) of the
approval using the “Notice of Review” form.
7/21/2015
24
International Accreditation Agreements
AMA PRA Category 1 credit™
Accredited NSSs may award for their own:
– Live group learning activities held in Canada and
web-based (which // face-to-face activities)
– University Offices = CACME agreement
– Accreditation statement, annual report
– New agreement January 1, 2013.
European Union of Medical Specialists
(UEMS) ECMEC
– Live group learning activities in Canada
– EU physicians convert (MOC) Section 1 to European
Continuing Medical Education Credits (ECMECs)
– Accreditation statement.
7/21/2015
25
International Accreditation Agreements
Substantive Equivalency
– Accreditation Council on Continuing Medical
Education (ACCME) recognized the Royal
College’s CPD accreditation system as
substantively equivalent.
– Activities developed by ACCME accredited
physician organizations do not need to be
reviewed for MOC Section 1 Credits.
Remember…
– All self-assessment programs (SAPs) must be
reviewed by an accredited CPD provider for MOC
Section 3 Credits
7/21/2015
26
How are we doing?
7/21/2015
27
Where can you get help?
 Your organization’s policies and procedures
 Royal College website
 CPD Accreditation Bulletin
 Are you on the listerv?!
 Office of Professional Affairs staff
 Mya Warken
 Sarah Beaton
 CACME (University Offices of CME)
 Your colleagues!
7/21/2015
28
Royal College Website
http://www.royalcollege.ca/portal/page/portal/rc/members/cpd/cpd_accreditation
7/21/2015
29
Did you find it?
7/21/2015
30
Conclusion
• Conclusions
• Next Steps
How can we help?
7/21/2015
31
Thank you!
Please complete the workshop evaluation
(delivered to your email!)
Please feel free to contact us:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
We’re here for the whole conference!
THANK YOU!
7/21/2015
32