The Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) has posted an updated list of ACCME accredited providers on its Web site, including more data than the ACCME has released previously. Accredited providers are institutions that produce continuing medical education (CME) that meets the ACCME's high standards for educational excellence and independence from commercial influence.
The list includes basic contact information plus the following details for each ACCME accredited provider:
- Current accreditation status (Accreditation, Accreditation with Commendation, Probation or Provisional Accreditation)
- Accredited based on the ACCME 2006 Accreditation Criteria (yes or no)
- Total numbers of activities, hours and participants reported
- Types of activities produced
- Receives commercial support (yes or no)
- Receives income from advertising or exhibits (yes or no)
- Participates in joint sponsorship (yes or no)
The provider list includes information supplied to the ACCME by accredited providers. To make the list most useful, it is posted in three formats: a PDF with providers listed alphabetically, a PDF with providers listed by state and an MSExcel® document.
"The ACCME is making more data public because we believe it will increase the system's transparency and accountability, allowing all stakeholders — including physician learners, licensing and certification bodies, and the public — to assess size, diversity, oversight, and enforcement of the accredited CME enterprise for themselves," said Murray Kopelow, MD, ACCME Chief Executive.
Rewarding Excellence
There are 729 ACCME accredited providers on the list. Of those, 124 (17 percent) have received Accreditation with Commendation, including 16 that have received Accreditation with Commendation under the 2006 Accreditation Criteria. The ACCME 2006 Accreditation Criteria raise the bar, positioning CME as a strategic partner in national initiatives to improve the quality and safety of patient care. The guidelines foster leadership and collaboration by rewarding providers with Accreditation with Commendation if they demonstrate (among other accomplishments) engagement with their environment through participation in institutional or system-wide initiatives to improve health care quality.
Increased Monitoring
Of the 729 accredited providers, 33 (5 percent) are on Probation for Non-compliance with ACCME requirements. Approximately 10 percent of providers are put on Probation in each accreditation review cycle, up from 2 percent in the past. This higher percentage represents the ACCME’s increased monitoring efforts and accelerated review procedures. The ACCME's strengthened enforcement process safeguards CME's independence and seeks to ensure that CME is free of commercial bias. Providers that are on Probation are allowed to continue to provide accredited CME, but are required to prepare immediate improvement plans for those areas found in Non-compliance, and to provide verification to ACCME that the improvements have been implemented within a specified time frame in order to maintain their accreditation.
ACCME Compliance Data
As part of the ACCME’s efforts to improve transparency, it has also released the aggregated and blinded compliance findings for 170 providers reviewed during the last three accreditation review cycles. These decisions were made in November 2008, March 2009 and July 2009. Figure 1 represents the aggregated compliance findings for providers. Each bar represents findings for all Providers for the specified Criterion, and shows the percentage of providers that have received findings of Not Applicable, Compliance, or Non-compliance. Figure 2 features a detailed breakdown of individual provider’s compliance findings. Providers are not identified by name.
Resources
For more information about the ACCME's accreditation system, check out the following resources:
- 2006 Accreditation Criteria
- Standards for Commercial Support: Standards to Ensure the Independence of CME Activities
- ACCME Decision-Making
- ACCME 2008 Annual Report Data
The ACCME is taking strong steps to ensure compliance and enforcement of their standards. They should be applauded for their increased diligence. Policy makers should take notice of these actions as important to ensuring the independence of the accredited CME system.
I agree with your applause for ACCME, Tom. For many years, ACCME has had standards for medical education accreditation to emulate, but did not position itself as an enforcement agency. A series of compliance challenges has more recently motivated ACCME to take more action:
1) Pharma and device companies correctly wish to promote the clinically proven benefits of their products, but of course where medical education accreditation is concerned, are biased to promote their own brands, which conflicts with the non-bias requirements of ACCME.
2) Medical Education and Communication Companies (MECCs), medical associations, institutions, and hospitals, who provide continuing medical education courses or CME online, are often challenged by last minute content submissions by authors whose writing does not comply with ACCME standards. This non-compliance leaves such businesses and institutions in a bind between the commercial sponsors and the authors and the audience, where the accredited provider must fight for content change within the constraints of a tightly scheduled event calendar. Some accredited providers do better than others, as evidenced by the commended and probationary providers you mention in your post.
I know all this because for years I have written, reviewed, and approved CME content. (I keep up with industry developments and now specialize in CME medical writing training.) I know the time and effort it takes to be compliant, which are both considerable.
What’s happening now, after great debate, and in an effort by the industry to regulate itself before congressional regulation takes over, is that a certification program has been created for industry executives. I anticipate this will result in two major developments for medical writers of CME: Providers of CME will require their writers be familiar with standards and industry trends, as well as innovative medical education techniques that results in learning translation and performance improvement.
No longer can anyone put together medical education conferences and online CME courses. The industry is being smart – not only enforcing its standards, but expecting writers to undergo CME medical writing training.