Cologne Consensus Conference: providers in accredited CME/CPD 11–12 September 2015, Cologne, Germany

Figures & data

Figure 1 Virtuous cycle: performance and quality improvement (reproduced from the presentation by P. Kearney).

Figure 2 Transfer of research into practice (reproduced from the presentation by G. Antes).

Figure 3 Sponsored CME and prescriptions (reproduced from the presentation by K. Lieb).

Table

Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada	Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education
History/background
Established early 2000, voluntary, hybrid provider/activity Principles: based on a set of standards; demonstrates accountability/fairness, mark of educational quality; promotes continuous quality improvement Governance: Royal College CPD Accreditation Committee sets the standards for accredited providers in national specialty societies and individual activities, overseen by the Royal College CPD Committee Committee on Accreditation of CME (CACME) sets the standards for accredited university offices of CME Positioned within the larger Maintenance of Certification Program framework for CPD activities	Created in 1981, comprising seven member organisations representing key US medical organisations Voluntary self-regulation, “for the profession, by the profession” Principles: linked to quality/safety, effective in improving practice, independent of commercial interests, based on valid content Bylaws/primary functions: accredit institutions offering CME, develop criteria, develop methods for measuring the effectiveness of CME
Provider eligibility
Canadian national organisation Aligned with a Royal College specialty, sub-speciality, or area of focused competency Physician organisation	Offer CME for physicians on a regular/recurring basis Valid content Not be a commercial interest (according to formal ACCME definition) Not provide CME that advocates unscientific modalities Cannot promote treatment known to be ineffective or whose risks outweigh benefits
Initial/reaccreditation process
Accreditation cycle 3–6 years, same process for initial application as for reapplication Coaching/submission of application Independent peer review 3-hour teleconference Draft of reviewers’ report CPD Accreditation Committee Final report to applicant Post-review teleconference Action plans/interim reports	Whether initial or reaccreditation, decision is based on three sources of data: Self-study report Evidence in performance-in-practice Accreditation interview Timelines for data collection, decision-making, and feedback/decision notification: Initial accreditation: after determining eligibility, 12 months Reaccreditation every 2–4–6 years depending on accreditation status
Standards/criteria
Twelve provider standards organised into three sections: purpose/mission, educational planning/implementation/evaluation, sustainability Each standard includes the standard/anchor/description, evaluation criteria, documentation requirements, self-study questions Document checklist and glossary of terms are included	Combination of provider/programme-level and activity-level standards designed conceptually around the Plan–Do–Study–Act quality improvement methodology and engagement with the environment Criteria 1–13 required for accreditation, 16–22 for accreditation with commendation Additional policies for verifying physician participation, maintaining records, and submitting reports/fees
Education/support
Strong organisational commitment to and investment in provider education and support via educational conferences, newsletters, website resources, tools, best practices, and staff support for questions/requests for information.
Monitoring: fees, reports, complaints, data
Action plans (typically first year of cycle) to address standards deemed non-adherent or partially adherent Interim reports (by mid-cycle) demonstrating how the providers implemented their action plans Royal College CPD unit provides feedback and reassesses standards as required (focus on continuous quality improvement) No direct fees; system funded by the Royal College	Progress reports to address areas of non-compliance identified in reaccreditation (focus on continuous quality improvement) Online complaints process Focused surveys Annual reporting online in Program and Activity Reporting System (PARS) Fee schedule variable, for example, initial accreditation $8,000, annual accreditation $5,400
International agreements
Credit conversion to/from: AMA PRA Category 1 Credit Agreement European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS)	Recognition of Royal College's CPD accreditation system as substantially equivalent Recognition of Committee on Accreditation of CME of Canada as substantially equivalent Recognition of the European Board for Accreditation of Cardiology as substantially equivalent Recognition of the Oman Medical Specialty Board of the Ministry of Health of the Sultanate of Oman as substantially equivalent
Future
Accreditation alignment across the medical education continuum Accreditation management system (IT) National CPD provider standards National standard for support of accredited CPD activities Evolved eligibility requirements	Commendation criteria Alignment with other systems Needs of stakeholders (e.g. maintenance of certification, licensure, quality, safety, the continuum of medical education) Attention to education research Relationships with learners Interprofessional continuing education Global relationships (accreditors and providers)

Figure 4 What ACCME is doing to support lifelong learning (reproduced from the presentation by G. McMahon).

Figure 5 CPD framework and cycle requirements (reproduced from the presentation by S. Aboulsoud).

Figure 6 Description of German healthcare system (reproduced from the presentation by D. Schulenburg, R. Griebenow).

Figure 7 Future directions: “the how” for CPD providers (reproduced from the presentation by C. Campbell).

Figure 8 Future directions: “the how”for the CPD accreditation system (reproduced from the presentation by C. Campbell).