Accreditation 101-Understanding the BasicsAuthors: George Fox and Mya WarkenDate: September 20, 2012

04/21/23 2

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

Introductions

• George Fox

– Chair, Royal College CPD Accreditation Committee

• Mya Warken

– Senior CPD Accreditation Specialist

04/21/23 3

04/21/23 4

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.

What are you looking for?

04/21/23 5

The Maintenance of Certification Program

Section Details

Section 1-Accredited Group Learning Activities

•Accredited rounds, journal clubs, small grouplearning• 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 Self- Assessment Programs)•Performance Assessment (Accredited Simulation Activities)

04/21/23 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!”

04/21/23 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)

04/21/23 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 StandardsOthers?

04/21/23 9

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 StandardsOthers?

04/21/23 10

Who Can Review an Application for Section 1

Accredited Providers

What is the Basis of the Accreditation Processhnn.m nA structure and process which enables the same criteria as for Section 1 review (+)Standard Operating Procedures to support the structure and process

– Policies– Procedures– Documentation, Records

Administrative structure and resources to support the SOPs

Who Can Review an Application for Section 1

What is the Basis of the Application to be an Accredited CPD Provider

Reviewing an Application for Section 1

Section 1 Requirements:

Part A: Administrative Standards (physician organization)

Part B: Educational Standards

Part C: Ethical Standards

04/21/23 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

04/21/23 12

Exercise and Discussion

04/21/23 13

Using the definition provided, review the organization examples to determine if they meet the Royal College definition of “physician organization”.

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

04/21/23 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.

04/21/23 15

Learning objectives

2. Learning objectives communicated to audience– Identified needs are used to create learning objectives

for:• Overall program• Individual sessions within the program

– Learning objectives are communicated to participants in advance

• 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.

04/21/23 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

04/21/23 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

04/21/23 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).

04/21/23 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).

04/21/23 20

Ethical Standards (cont’d)

1. Physician organization controls:a) topic(s)b) contentc) 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)

04/21/23 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.

04/21/23 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

04/21/23 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.

04/21/23 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.

04/21/23 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

04/21/23 26

How are we doing?

04/21/23 27

Where can you get help?

04/21/23 28

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!

Royal College Website

04/21/23 29

http://www.royalcollege.ca/portal/page/portal/rc/members/cpd/cpd_accreditation

Did you find it?

04/21/23 30

Conclusion

• Conclusions

• Next Steps

How can we help?

04/21/23 31

Thank you!

Please complete the workshop evaluation (delivered to your email!)

Please feel free to contact us:

mwarken@royalcollege.ca

sbeaton@royalcollege.ca

cpd-accreditation@royalcollege.ca

We’re here for the whole conference!

THANK YOU!

04/21/23 32