Arja Sateesh B, White Bobbie Ann, Fayyaz Jabeen, Thompson Anne
Medical Education Unit, Avalon University School of Medicine, Willemstad, Curacao, Netherlands Antilles.
Health Professions Education Program, MGH Institute of Health Professions Education, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
MedEdPublish (2016). 2024 May 23;14:13. doi: 10.12688/mep.20142.2. eCollection 2024.
Accreditation in medical education has existed for more than 100 years, yet the impact of accreditation remains inconclusive. Some studies have shown the effects of accreditation on student outcomes and educational processes at medical schools. However, evidence showing the impact of accreditation on continuous quality improvement of undergraduate medical education programs is still in its infancy. This scoping review explores the impact of accreditation on continuous quality improvement (CQI).
This scoping review followed the methodology of the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and the Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist outlined by Arksey and O'Malley (2005). Databases, including PubMed, Medline, ERIC, CINHAL, and Google Scholar, were searched to find articles from 2000 to 2022 related to the accreditation of undergraduate medical education programs and continuous quality improvement.
A total of 35 full-text articles were reviewed, and ten articles met our inclusion criteria. The review of the full-text articles yielded four themes: Accreditation and its standards in general, Accreditation and its impact on student outcomes, Accreditation and its impact on medical school's educational processes, Accreditation and CQI. However, the literature evidence suggesting the impact of accreditation on CQI is minimal. The quality assurance approach is based on meeting the standards of accreditation. The quality improvement approach is based on striving for excellence. Literature suggests a requirement to move from student outcomes to CQI measures. CQI requires everyone in the organization to take responsibility and accountability, considering quality as the result of every single step or process and leaders supporting improvements in data collection and data analysis for quality improvement.
The literature on accreditation and CQI are limited in number. More research studies are required to enhance undergraduate medical education accreditation practices' value to medical students, educators, academic leaders, programs, and the public. It was recommended that medical schools embrace the culture and vision perpetuated by the CQI process.
医学教育认证已存在100多年，但认证的影响仍无定论。一些研究显示了认证对医学院校学生成绩和教育过程的影响。然而，表明认证对本科医学教育项目持续质量改进影响的证据仍处于初期阶段。本范围综述探讨认证对持续质量改进（CQI）的影响。
本范围综述遵循系统评价的首选报告项目和Arksey与O'Malley（2005年）概述的范围综述的元分析扩展（PRISMA-ScR）清单的方法。检索了包括PubMed、Medline、ERIC、CINHAL和谷歌学术在内的数据库，以查找2000年至2022年与本科医学教育项目认证和持续质量改进相关的文章。
共审查了35篇全文文章，其中10篇文章符合我们的纳入标准。对全文文章的审查产生了四个主题：一般意义上的认证及其标准、认证及其对学生成绩的影响、认证及其对医学院校教育过程的影响、认证与持续质量改进。然而，表明认证对持续质量改进有影响的文献证据很少。质量保证方法基于符合认证标准。质量改进方法基于追求卓越。文献表明需要从学生成绩指标转向持续质量改进指标。持续质量改进要求组织中的每个人都承担责任，将质量视为每一步或每一个过程的结果，并要求领导者支持为质量改进而进行的数据收集和数据分析。
关于认证和持续质量改进的文献数量有限。需要更多的研究来提高本科医学教育认证实践对医学生、教育工作者、学术领导、项目和公众的价值。建议医学院校接受持续质量改进过程所秉持的文化和愿景。
