There were a number of events surrounding the Alliance for CME Annual Meeting. A few of them are worth recapping:

• Clarification on Inclusion of Chapter on Engagement with the Environment (Criteria 16-22) in Self Studies — One presenter at the annual meeting quoted from a letter by Dr. Kopelow that implied that all self studies submitted after the March 2010 cohort had to include the chapter on C16-22 regardless of whether the provider intended to qualify for a Level 3 accreditation. This was news to us! In a clarification letter from the ACCME, they indicated they would like providers to explain what they do with regards to the section on Engagement with the Environment, but it was not a mandated requirement. If resources are such that the provider has no intention of qualifying for Level 3 and time doesn’t permit the chapter to be written, it is not required.

• Report of an Academic Provider Being Investigated by the Senate Finance Committee Relating to COI — Despite evidence of content review and validation during the planning process for activities developed by a specific academic provider (funded by a major pharmaceutical company) the Senate Finance Committee, aided by an investigative reporter, began an investigation into this multiple intervention activity. All members of the advisory group assembled to oversee and direct the content of the project had COI with the source of funding. The content was also deemed controversial regarding the patient care recommendations included. So the issue of COI and whether it can be resolved by content review was questioned. Regardless of how this turns out, it is clear that the fundamental relationships of key physician content planners must be examined more closely. This issue, I’m afraid, will further play into the hands of those who are advocating that key planners have no promotional relationships with supporters or key manufacturers of products discussed in the activity for at least 12 months prior to the planning process. Due diligence in the area of identification and resolution of COI are imperative!

• General Confirmation of Declining Amounts of Commercial Support — It was certainly clear from hallway conversations as well as formal presentations by the pharmaceutical industry, that the overall amount of commercial support over the past year is down significantly from the previous year. Moreover, it also became crystal clear that those organizations that will receive grants going forward must demonstrate (1) a clear understanding of adult learning principles, skills and ability to conduct gap analyses and targeted outcomes measurements that can measure improvement in competence and/or performance and/or improvement in patient outcomes. We can’t emphasize enough how important it is to develop these skill sets as an integral part of every provider’s organization (and not just contract out for them).

  On a related note, we have discovered a week-long course on adult learning skills offered by Langevin Learning Services (www.langevin.com) for under $4,000 and another one-day seminar on adult learning. Check it out.
  

• ACCME Explains the Updated Criteria — Steve Singer, from the ACCME staff, offered an intensive symposium at the Alliance that, in our opinion, provided the most detailed information to date on the interpretation of the updated ACCME Criteria for Accreditation. This slide set is worth reviewing and can be accessed as follows: http://www.accme.org/dir_docs/doc_upload/ea6a2e4f-7804-4c11-9dd5-85924f7aa80e_uploaddocument.htm . It is consistent with our trainings and reinforces many of our definitions, such as gap analysis and educational outcomes measurements and their definitions and requirements. It also provides the context for the criteria concerning engagement with the environment.