Literature DB >> 22132286

Internal reviews benefit programs of the review team members and the program under review.

Kathryn M Andolsek, Alisa Nagler, Leslie Dodd, John L Weinerth.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) mandates that sponsoring institutions conduct internal reviews. In 1998, the ACGME Institutional Review Committee gave Duke University Hospital a citation for an inadequate internal review (IR) process. Since then, we have instituted several iterative changes. We describe the evolution of Duke University Hospital's current internal review process. INTERVENTION: We implemented a new review team composition, template report, use of the program information form, and centralization of documentation to improve our internal review process. In 2007, a more formal evaluation of the outcome and impact of these changes was instituted. This included a yearly survey of all participants and review team members, a review of programs, and a tracking process for the decisions of our Graduate Medical Education Committee (GMEC) on the status of reviewed programs.
RESULTS: Participants from both the program under review and the review team evaluated the process favorably. Review teams reported they learned from the best practices of the program being reviewed. Program directors from the reviewed programs reported the process improved their documentation. Both groups reported the process better prepared them for their next ACGME Review Committee site visit. The GMEC has recommended "probationary sponsorship" for fewer programs since the IR process changes have been implemented. The IR process was recognized as a best practice in Duke University Hospital's 2004 ACGME institutional review.
CONCLUSION: We believe our IR process, review-team composition, template report, program information form, and centralized documentation now fully meets accreditation standards. Participants are reasonably satisfied and report value from the process. More programs are judged to be within substantial compliance by the GMEC.

Entities:  

Year:  2010        PMID: 22132286      PMCID: PMC3010948          DOI: 10.4300/JGME-D-10-00063.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Grad Med Educ        ISSN: 1949-8357


  4 in total

1.  Determining the predictors of internal medicine residency accreditation: what they do (not what they say).

Authors:  Brent W Beasley; David R Scrase; Henry J Schultz
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 6.893

2.  Internal program review.

Authors:  Jannette Collins
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  The internal review: simplifying a tedious task.

Authors:  D S Hartman
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 3.173

4.  A peer review process to assess the quality of graduate medical education.

Authors:  H Levine; E Vanek; G Lefferts; W Michener; G Weiker
Journal:  J Med Educ       Date:  1988-04
  4 in total
  2 in total

1.  Facilitating Institutional Oversight and Program Improvement Through Educational Competency Committees.

Authors:  Kathryn M Andolsek; Rhea F Fortune; Alisa Nagler; Chrystal Stancil; Catherine Kuhn; Diana McNeill
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2016-07

2.  Optimizing the post-graduate institutional program evaluation process.

Authors:  Monica L Lypson; Mark E P Prince; Steven J Kasten; Nicholas H Osborne; Richard H Cohan; Terry Kowalenko; Paul J Dougherty; R Kevin Reynolds; M Catherine Spires; Jeffrey H Kozlow; Scott D Gitlin
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 2.463

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.