Dual accreditation in CPD: enhancing learning, equity, and health system integration

Morag Paton; Maria Jennifer Estrella; David Wiljer

doi:10.36834/mwfm4v20

Authors

Morag Paton University of Toronto https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9934-9784
Maria Jennifer Estrella University of Toronto https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6398-0964
David Wiljer University of Toronto https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2748-2658

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36834/mwfm4v20

Abstract

Background: As an accredited CPD provider, we regularly accredit programs for Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada credits and The College of Family Physicians of Canada Mainpro+ credits. Historically, program directors seeking both credit types submitted a single application for dual accreditation (i.e. assessed and reviewed for both credit types simultaneously). With evolving accreditation requirements, the ability to submit a single application has decreased. To support internal decision-making, we asked: what is the value of dual accreditation?

Methods: Following ethical approval and informed consent, we conducted semi-structured interviews with program directors of dually accredited programs from 2022-2024. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.

Results: Twelve program directors participated. We identified three key themes reflecting the perceived value of dual accreditation: enriching learning by supporting intraprofessional learning and practice; promoting equity and belonging; and moving toward an integrated health system.

Conclusions: Dual accreditation holds significant value. As care models become more integrated, dual accreditation supports efforts to connect practice and learning among intraprofessional teams. This study highlights the benefits of accreditation scholarship, contributing to broader insights into the practices and decisions of CPD provider organizations.

Author Biographies

Morag Paton, University of Toronto

Associate Director, Maintenance of Certification & Education Consultation Services. Continuing Professional Development, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Maria Jennifer Estrella, University of Toronto

Research Analyst, Continuing Professional Development, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
David Wiljer, University of Toronto

Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Academic Director in Continuing Professional Development in the Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto; Executive Director of Education, Technology & Innovation at the University Health Network, Toronto, Canada; Scientist, Wilson Centre at the University Health Network and Temerty Faculty of Medicine.

References

1. Committee on Accreditation on Continuing Medical Education. Accredited CPD Offices [Internet]. Committee on Accreditation on Continuing Medical Education. 2023 [cited 2023 Jul 17]. Available from: https://cacme-caemc.ca/about-cacms/accredited-programs/

2. The College of Family Physicians of Canada. Understanding the Updated Mainpro+® Program Requirements [Internet]. 2024 [cited 2024 Aug 29]. Available from: https://www.cfpc.ca/en/education-professional-development/mainpro/understanding-the-updated-mainpro-program-requirem

3. Graves L, Rudkowski J. Moving Accreditation Forward With Accreditation Scholarship. Academic Medicine [Internet]. 2023 Oct 16 [cited 2024 Jul 24];10.1097/ACM.0000000000005799. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/abstract/9900/moving_accreditation_forward_with_accreditation.896.aspx

4. Curran VR, Fleet L, Deacon D. A Comparative Review of Canadian Health Professional Education Accreditation Systems. Canadian Journal of Higher Education [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2024 Jul 23];36(1):79–102. Available from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ771039

5. McMahon GT. Facilitating Flexibility: The Role of CPD Regulators and Accreditors during a Crisis. J Eur CME [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2022 Nov 28];10(1):1993432. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8592616/

6. McMahon GT. Accreditation rules ensure that CME serves the needs of patients and the public. BMJ. 2021;374(8900488, bmj, 101090866):n1780.

7. Oandasan I, Reeves S. Key elements of interprofessional education. Part 2: Factors, processes and outcomes. Journal of Interprofessional Care [Internet]. 2005 May [cited 2024 Jul 24];19(sup1):39–48. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13561820500081703

8. Braun V, Clarke V. One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative research in psychology. 2021;18(3):328–52.

9. Braun V, Clarke V, Hayfield N, Davey L, Jenkinson E. Doing Reflexive Thematic Analysis. In: Bager-Charleson S, McBeath A, editors. Supporting Research in Counselling and Psychotherapy : Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Research [Internet]. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2022 [cited 2024 Jul 31]. p. 19–38. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13942-0_2

10. Suter E, Oelke ND, Lima MAD da S, Stiphout M, Janke R, Witt RR, et al. Indicators and Measurement Tools for Health Systems Integration: A Knowledge Synthesis. International Journal of Integrated Care [Internet]. 2017 Nov 13 [cited 2025 Feb 21];17(6). Available from: https://ijic.org/articles/10.5334/ijic.3931

11. Ontario Ministry of Health. Your Health: A Plan for Connected and Convenient Care [Internet]. Health and Wellness. 2023 [cited 2025 Feb 21]. Available from: http://www.ontario.ca/page/your-health-plan-connected-and-convenient-care

12. Cervero RM, Gaines JK. The impact of CME on physician performance and patient health outcomes: an updated synthesis of systematic reviews. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions. 2015;35(2):131–8.