Effective accreditation in postgraduate medical education: from process to outcomes and back

Background The accreditation of medical educational programs is thought to be important in supporting program improvement, ensuring the quality of the education, and promoting diversity, equity, and population health. It has long been recognized that accreditation systems will need to shift their focus from processes to outcomes, particularly those related to the end goals of medical education: the creation of broadly competent, confident professionals and the improvement of health for individuals and populations. An international group of experts in accreditation convened in 2013 to discuss this shift. Main text Participants unequivocally supported the inclusion of more outcomes-based criteria in medical education accreditation, specifically those related to the societal accountability of the institutions in which the education occurs. Meaningful and feasible outcome metrics, however, are hard to identify. They are regionally variable, often temporally remote from the educational program, difficult to measure, and susceptible to confounding factors. The group identified the importance of health outcomes of the clinical milieu in which education takes place in influencing outcomes of its graduates. The ability to link clinical data with individual practice over time is becoming feasible with large repositories of assessment data linked to patient outcomes. This was seen as a key opportunity to provide more continuous oversight and monitoring of program impact. The discussants identified several risks that might arise should outcomes measures completely replace process issues. Some outcomes can be measured only by proxy process elements, and some learner experience issues may best be measured by such process elements: in brief, the “how” still matters. Conclusions Accrediting bodies are beginning to view the use of practice outcome measures as an important step toward better continuous educational quality improvement. The use of outcomes will present challenges in data collection, aggregation, and interpretation. Large datasets that capture clinical outcomes, experience of care, and health system performance may enable the assessment of multiple dimensions of program quality, assure the public that the social contract is being upheld, and allow identification of exemplary programs such that all may improve. There remains a need to retain some focus on process, particularly those related to the learner experience.

[1]  David L Buckeridge,et al.  Physician scores on a national clinical skills examination as predictors of complaints to medical regulatory authorities. , 2007, JAMA.

[2]  Ruth B Hoppe,et al.  "Best practice" for patient-centered communication: a narrative review. , 2013, Journal of graduate medical education.

[3]  J. Frank,et al.  Implementing competency-based medical education: Moving forward , 2017, Medical teacher.

[4]  I. Philibert,et al.  The next GME accreditation system--rationale and benefits. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  R. Harden,et al.  The Scottish doctor--learning outcomes for the medical undergraduate in Scotland: a foundation for competent and reflective practitioners , 2002, Medical teacher.

[6]  J. Frank,et al.  The CanMEDS initiative: implementing an outcomes-based framework of physician competencies , 2007, Medical teacher.

[7]  F. Mullan,et al.  Spending patterns in region of residency training and subsequent expenditures for care provided by practicing physicians for Medicare beneficiaries. , 2014, JAMA.

[8]  R. Lipner,et al.  The association between residency training and internists' ability to practice conservatively. , 2014, JAMA internal medicine.

[9]  J. Norcini,et al.  Implementation of competency‐based medical education: are we addressing the concerns and challenges? , 2015, Medical education.

[10]  B. Hodges A tea-steeping or i-Doc model for medical education? , 2010, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[11]  R. Harden,et al.  Assessment of clinical competence using an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). , 1979, Medical education.

[12]  Robyn Tamblyn,et al.  Association between licensure examination scores and practice in primary care. , 2002, JAMA.

[13]  E. Fried,et al.  A National Survey to Evaluate Graduate Medical Education in Disparities and Limited English Proficiency: A Report From the AAIM Diversity and Inclusion Committee. , 2016, The American journal of medicine.

[14]  I. Philibert,et al.  Responsiveness to societal needs in postgraduate medical education: the role of accreditation , 2020, BMC Medical Education.

[15]  H. O’Sullivan,et al.  Graduates from a reformed undergraduate medical curriculum based on Tomorrow's Doctors evaluate the effectiveness of their curriculum 6 years after graduation through interviews , 2010, BMC medical education.

[16]  Paul Batalden,et al.  General competencies and accreditation in graduate medical education. , 2002, Health affairs.

[17]  Kevin B Weiss,et al.  The accreditation system after the "next accreditation system". , 2014, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[18]  J Norcini,et al.  Association between licensing examination scores and resource use and quality of care in primary care practice. , 1998, JAMA.

[19]  D. Asch,et al.  Evaluating obstetrical residency programs using patient outcomes. , 2009, JAMA.

[20]  G. Thibault,et al.  Competency-Based, Time-Variable Education in the Health Professions: Crossroads , 2018, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[21]  Y. Park,et al.  Ensuring a fair and equitable selection of students to serve society's health care needs , 2015, Medical education.

[22]  J. Norcini,et al.  An Overview of Accreditation, Certification, and Licensure Processes , 2010 .

[23]  A. Donabedian,et al.  The quality of care. How can it be assessed? , 1988, JAMA.

[24]  Hilde van der Togt,et al.  Publisher's Note , 2003, J. Netw. Comput. Appl..

[25]  A. Donabedian The quality of care. How can it be assessed? , 1988, JAMA.

[26]  D. Berwick,et al.  The triple aim: care, health, and cost. , 2008, Health affairs.