Evolving Alignment in International Continuing Professional Development Accreditation

Abstract

Several of the world's accreditation systems for continuing professional development (CPD) are evolving to encourage continuous improvement in the competence and performance of health care providers and in the organizations in which they provide patient care. Clinicians learn best when they can to choose from a diverse array of activities and formats that are relevant and meet their needs. Since choice and diversity are key to meeting clinicians' needs, several CPD accreditors have been engaging in deliberate, concerted efforts to identify a core set of principles that can serve as the basis for determining substantive equivalency between CPD accreditation systems. Substantive equivalency is intended to support the mobility of learners, allowing them to access accredited learning activities that are recognized by various CPD accreditation systems in a manner that maximizes the value of those accreditation systems, while minimizing the burden of adhering to their requirements. In this article, we propose a set of core principles that all CPD accreditation systems must express as the basis for determining substantive equivalency between CPD accreditation systems. The article will illustrate how five CPD accreditation systems (two in the USA, two in Canada, and one in Qatar), differing in focus (activity-based versus provider-based), context, and culture, express these values and metrics, and concludes by identifying the value of substantive equivalency for learners, medical regulators, and CPD accreditation systems.

The Role and Rise of Interprofessional Continuing Education

“…The recognition of IPCE will encourage clinicians to continuously improve their ability to deliver optimal care for their patients. 18 To maximize the benefits of IPCE, institutional leaders need to think of it as a professional development vehicle that can help them to achieve their goals in clinical and nonclinical areas, such as quality and safety, process improvements, professionalism, team communication and workforce cohesiveness and motivation. Leaders need to invest in training their IPCE administration professionals, faculty and mentors to ensure that the IPCE program supports strategic priorities by delivering effective, efficient education that meets regulatory and accreditation requirements.…”

Standards of substantive equivalence between accreditation systems for continuous professional development

“…Оскільки вибір та різноманітність є ключо вими для задоволення освітніх потреб лікарів, відомі міжнародні організації, які займаються питаннями акредитації БПР, постійно докла дають цілеспрямованих, узгоджених зусиль для визначення принципів, що можуть бути основою для створення та впровадження істот ної, або суттєвої, еквівалентності між систе мами акредитації БПР. Істотна еквівалентність призначена для підтримки мобільності лікарів, дає їм змогу отримати доступ до акредитованих навчальних занять, що визнаються різними системами акредитації БПР таким чином, щоб максимально підвищити значення цих систем акредитації і мінімізувати при цьому тягар дотримання їхніх вимог [4].…”

Vive la Différence: A Comparison of CPD Quality Assurance Systems in France and The United States

“…We believe that a key responsibility for accrediting bodies and other regulatory bodies is to create connections between nations, systems, and professions. Although there are differences in systems within and between nations, there is also a commonality of goals (See Table 1 ) [ 2 , 3 ].…”