How changing quality management influenced PGME accreditation: a focus on decentralization and quality improvement

Nesibe Akdemir, Kiki M J M H Lombarts, Emma Paternotte, Bas Schreuder, Fedde Scheele

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Evaluating the quality of postgraduate medical education (PGME) programs through accreditation is common practice worldwide. Accreditation is shaped by educational quality and quality management. An appropriate accreditation design is important, as it may drive improvements in training. Moreover, accreditors determine whether a PGME program passes the assessment, which may have major consequences, such as starting, continuing or discontinuing PGME. However, there is limited evidence for the benefits of different choices in accreditation design. Therefore, this study aims to explain how changing views on educational quality and quality management have impacted the design of the PGME accreditation system in the Netherlands.

METHODS: To determine the historical development of the Dutch PGME accreditation system, we conducted a document analysis of accreditation documents spanning the past 50 years and a vision document outlining the future system. A template analysis technique was used to identify the main elements of the system.

RESULTS: Four themes in the Dutch PGME accreditation system were identified: (1) objectives of accreditation, (2) PGME quality domains, (3) quality management approaches and (4) actors' responsibilities. Major shifts have taken place regarding decentralization, residency performance and physician practice outcomes, and quality improvement. Decentralization of the responsibilities of the accreditor was absent in 1966, but this has been slowly changing since 1999. In the future system, there will be nearly a maximum degree of decentralization. A focus on outcomes and quality improvement has been introduced in the current system. The number of formal documents striving for quality assurance has increased enormously over the past 50 years, which has led to increased bureaucracy. The future system needs to decrease the number of standards to focus on measurable outcomes and to strive for quality improvement.

CONCLUSION: The challenge for accreditors is to find the right balance between trusting and controlling medical professionals. Their choices will be reflected in the accreditation design. The four themes could enhance international comparisons and encourage better choices in the design of accreditation systems.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)98
JournalBMC Medical Education
Volume17
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Jun 2017

Cite this

Akdemir, Nesibe ; Lombarts, Kiki M J M H ; Paternotte, Emma ; Schreuder, Bas ; Scheele, Fedde. / How changing quality management influenced PGME accreditation : a focus on decentralization and quality improvement. In: BMC Medical Education. 2017 ; Vol. 17, No. 1. pp. 98.
@article{1b1a4d963e114399bfc702ecc4b1a3ee,
title = "How changing quality management influenced PGME accreditation: a focus on decentralization and quality improvement",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Evaluating the quality of postgraduate medical education (PGME) programs through accreditation is common practice worldwide. Accreditation is shaped by educational quality and quality management. An appropriate accreditation design is important, as it may drive improvements in training. Moreover, accreditors determine whether a PGME program passes the assessment, which may have major consequences, such as starting, continuing or discontinuing PGME. However, there is limited evidence for the benefits of different choices in accreditation design. Therefore, this study aims to explain how changing views on educational quality and quality management have impacted the design of the PGME accreditation system in the Netherlands.METHODS: To determine the historical development of the Dutch PGME accreditation system, we conducted a document analysis of accreditation documents spanning the past 50 years and a vision document outlining the future system. A template analysis technique was used to identify the main elements of the system.RESULTS: Four themes in the Dutch PGME accreditation system were identified: (1) objectives of accreditation, (2) PGME quality domains, (3) quality management approaches and (4) actors' responsibilities. Major shifts have taken place regarding decentralization, residency performance and physician practice outcomes, and quality improvement. Decentralization of the responsibilities of the accreditor was absent in 1966, but this has been slowly changing since 1999. In the future system, there will be nearly a maximum degree of decentralization. A focus on outcomes and quality improvement has been introduced in the current system. The number of formal documents striving for quality assurance has increased enormously over the past 50 years, which has led to increased bureaucracy. The future system needs to decrease the number of standards to focus on measurable outcomes and to strive for quality improvement.CONCLUSION: The challenge for accreditors is to find the right balance between trusting and controlling medical professionals. Their choices will be reflected in the accreditation design. The four themes could enhance international comparisons and encourage better choices in the design of accreditation systems.",
keywords = "Journal Article",
author = "Nesibe Akdemir and Lombarts, {Kiki M J M H} and Emma Paternotte and Bas Schreuder and Fedde Scheele",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1186/s12909-017-0937-9",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
pages = "98",
journal = "BMC Medical Education",
issn = "1472-6920",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

How changing quality management influenced PGME accreditation : a focus on decentralization and quality improvement. / Akdemir, Nesibe; Lombarts, Kiki M J M H; Paternotte, Emma; Schreuder, Bas; Scheele, Fedde.

In: BMC Medical Education, Vol. 17, No. 1, 02.06.2017, p. 98.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - How changing quality management influenced PGME accreditation

T2 - a focus on decentralization and quality improvement

AU - Akdemir, Nesibe

AU - Lombarts, Kiki M J M H

AU - Paternotte, Emma

AU - Schreuder, Bas

AU - Scheele, Fedde

PY - 2017/6/2

Y1 - 2017/6/2

N2 - BACKGROUND: Evaluating the quality of postgraduate medical education (PGME) programs through accreditation is common practice worldwide. Accreditation is shaped by educational quality and quality management. An appropriate accreditation design is important, as it may drive improvements in training. Moreover, accreditors determine whether a PGME program passes the assessment, which may have major consequences, such as starting, continuing or discontinuing PGME. However, there is limited evidence for the benefits of different choices in accreditation design. Therefore, this study aims to explain how changing views on educational quality and quality management have impacted the design of the PGME accreditation system in the Netherlands.METHODS: To determine the historical development of the Dutch PGME accreditation system, we conducted a document analysis of accreditation documents spanning the past 50 years and a vision document outlining the future system. A template analysis technique was used to identify the main elements of the system.RESULTS: Four themes in the Dutch PGME accreditation system were identified: (1) objectives of accreditation, (2) PGME quality domains, (3) quality management approaches and (4) actors' responsibilities. Major shifts have taken place regarding decentralization, residency performance and physician practice outcomes, and quality improvement. Decentralization of the responsibilities of the accreditor was absent in 1966, but this has been slowly changing since 1999. In the future system, there will be nearly a maximum degree of decentralization. A focus on outcomes and quality improvement has been introduced in the current system. The number of formal documents striving for quality assurance has increased enormously over the past 50 years, which has led to increased bureaucracy. The future system needs to decrease the number of standards to focus on measurable outcomes and to strive for quality improvement.CONCLUSION: The challenge for accreditors is to find the right balance between trusting and controlling medical professionals. Their choices will be reflected in the accreditation design. The four themes could enhance international comparisons and encourage better choices in the design of accreditation systems.

AB - BACKGROUND: Evaluating the quality of postgraduate medical education (PGME) programs through accreditation is common practice worldwide. Accreditation is shaped by educational quality and quality management. An appropriate accreditation design is important, as it may drive improvements in training. Moreover, accreditors determine whether a PGME program passes the assessment, which may have major consequences, such as starting, continuing or discontinuing PGME. However, there is limited evidence for the benefits of different choices in accreditation design. Therefore, this study aims to explain how changing views on educational quality and quality management have impacted the design of the PGME accreditation system in the Netherlands.METHODS: To determine the historical development of the Dutch PGME accreditation system, we conducted a document analysis of accreditation documents spanning the past 50 years and a vision document outlining the future system. A template analysis technique was used to identify the main elements of the system.RESULTS: Four themes in the Dutch PGME accreditation system were identified: (1) objectives of accreditation, (2) PGME quality domains, (3) quality management approaches and (4) actors' responsibilities. Major shifts have taken place regarding decentralization, residency performance and physician practice outcomes, and quality improvement. Decentralization of the responsibilities of the accreditor was absent in 1966, but this has been slowly changing since 1999. In the future system, there will be nearly a maximum degree of decentralization. A focus on outcomes and quality improvement has been introduced in the current system. The number of formal documents striving for quality assurance has increased enormously over the past 50 years, which has led to increased bureaucracy. The future system needs to decrease the number of standards to focus on measurable outcomes and to strive for quality improvement.CONCLUSION: The challenge for accreditors is to find the right balance between trusting and controlling medical professionals. Their choices will be reflected in the accreditation design. The four themes could enhance international comparisons and encourage better choices in the design of accreditation systems.

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1186/s12909-017-0937-9

DO - 10.1186/s12909-017-0937-9

M3 - Article

VL - 17

SP - 98

JO - BMC Medical Education

JF - BMC Medical Education

SN - 1472-6920

IS - 1

ER -