Building Momentum Single GME transition: Your top questions answered AOA President-elect Boyd R. Buser, DO, shares the latest updates and answers questions about the single GME accreditation system. Oct. 8, 2015Thursday Rose Raymond Contact Rose Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Topics osteopathic medical educationresidency trainingsingle GME accreditationvideo As the medical profession moves toward a single accreditation system for graduate medical education, AOA President-elect Boyd R. Buser, DO, is most excited about the opportunities it presents for the growth of osteopathic medicine. “Osteopathic training and the osteopathic approach to treating patients will be open to a broader audience,” he says. “That’s a big opportunity for us.” Dr. Buser sat down with The DO to share the latest updates on the transition process and discuss common questions he hears from students, program directors and other members of the osteopathic family. Some hospitals and program directors are worried about the potential for increased costs and administrative burden. There is concern, particularly among our smaller programs, that the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education standards for administrative support of the programs may require more resources than the AOA requirements do. Program directors should be aware they can obtain ACGME accreditation by reaching substantial compliance with the standards. If you can demonstrate that you have a high-quality program, you are not going to be denied accreditation based solely on your program’s size. On the other hand, there are also a lot of costs associated with ending residency programs, and hospitals need to take that into account as well. We encourage them to take a broader look at the financial picture and not just focus on whether they’re going to have to hire more staff in order to meet the absolute letter of the standards. Dr. Buser discusses the single GME accreditation system and board certification. How will the transition affect board certification? AOA board certification will remain a separate entity from American Board of Medical Specialties board certification. The new single GME accreditation system is about the accreditation of residency programs only. Osteopathic board certification, undergraduate medical education, licensure exams and continuing medical education will be preserved and safeguarded in this transition. What are your thoughts on the partnership between the AOA, the ACGME and the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine? [story-sidebar id=”184884″] Over the three-plus years we’ve all been working together, we’ve built some very strong relationships and a lot of trust. There’s an understanding among all parties that all of us are doing this for the right reasons. The executive directors of the ACGME’s residency review committees have bent over backwards to help our programs navigate the application process. What can medical students do to determine if the residency programs they are interested in intend to apply for ACGME accreditation? The programs that have applied for accreditation automatically enter into pre-accreditation status and are listed on the ACGME website. The website also lists newly accredited programs that have obtained initial accreditation. To find out if programs intend to apply, I encourage students to contact individual programs and ask the administrators what their plans are. Should students apply to five-year-plus programs in next year’s match if those programs have not yet announced their decision to transition? None of the five-year programs will be able to accept residents in 2016 if they haven’t applied for ACGME accreditation. Students want to know if there will be a single GME match. The National Resident Matching Program, which the ACGME-accredited programs participate in, and the AOA’s matching program will eventually be joined. It’s still too soon to say exactly when, but we want to make this happen in a way that benefits the students as soon as we possibly can. What’s next in the transition process? Institutions and programs will continue to move through the accreditation process. We also expect we will gradually see evolution in the standards for the various specialty programs. As the new DOs on residency review committees get acclimated, we will continue to see the effects of the perspective that the osteopathic programs are bringing into the single system. How will residents currently in AOA-accredited residency programs be impacted if those programs choose to not transition to ACGME? With very few exceptions, those residents will finish their programs by the end of the transition period in 2020. The ACGME and the AOA are working closely to make sure that all these trainees complete their programs and are not at risk of losing their program accreditation before their training is complete. Dr. Buser explains why he thinks residency programs should apply for osteopathic recognition. Previous article4 tools to ease your transition to ICD-10 Next articleOlder adults fall short in vaccination rates for shingles, flu
When will I be able to apply for allopathic board certification so I can drop my forced paid membership in the anti physician, anti patient AOA? When this happens, what requirements will there be for obtaining allopathic board certification? Oct. 8, 2015, at 10:14 pm Reply
I believe he is referring to the concept of “regulatory capture” in which DO’s certified in one of the AOA member boards is required to be an AOA member as a pre-requisite in order to be a diplomate in their specialty. Some believe this is illegal. This is not the case in the MD world, where they are just certified through the individual board, and don’t have to be members of the AMA. Oct. 16, 2015, at 10:06 am Reply
IF that is indeed the case then further explanation is STILL necessary from Jason The AMA is chartered as a POLITICAL organization and as such has no purview over the certifying board organizations as the boards alone determine certifying criteria. Tha AOA is chartered as an EDUCATIONAL organization and DOES have oversight of ALL Osteopathic certifying boards and therefore sets certifying criteria for ALL of those boards. We are D.O.s. We chose the profession. If he wants to be an M.D. then he made a bad decision. The AOA makes the rules. Follow them or not; the choice is his. I have my issues with the AOA also but the inflammatory statements about the AOA are simply ridiculous. He’d get more positive attention if he explained his position fully and kept the attempts at slandering his parent organization to himself. Oct. 17, 2015, at 12:51 pm Reply
Maurice: Your entire reply is a nonsequitur and displays a lot of probable ignorance on your part. Try to restate it in a coherent manner. Nov. 2, 2015, at 3:12 pm
a core subject in Osteopathic training has always been what is now called NMM as a distinctive and delineating component of our uniqueness. How is it that there are ZERO hmm programs listed as ACGME certified, pre certified, or pending certification and yet there are 45 allopathic programs listed for this and they do not have our curriculum? Taken From the Neuromuscular Medicine Programs Academic Year 2015-2016 United States pagecitation: https://apps.acgme.org/ads/Public/Reports/ReportRun?ReportId=1&CurrentYear=2015&SpecialtyId=146&IncludePreAccreditation=false Subheading of neurology and NMM is not a currently listed or recognized certification area under ACGME Oct. 16, 2015, at 7:45 am Reply
NMM as a subspecialty of neurology in the MD world is different than NMM/OMM in the DO world. The similarity of names could be a problem though. Perhaps a change of names is in order- especially since neuromuscularskeletal medicine & osteopathic manipulative medicine is such a mouthful (I gave up on having my daughter memorize it for when people asked what type of doctor her mommy was). I think Neuromuscularskeletal Manipulative Medicine (NMSMM) is a valid alternative for our specialty. http://medicine.yale.edu/neurology/patients/neuromuscular/ Oct. 17, 2015, at 8:22 am Reply
As with any merger, the first few years will be rough, however I do not doubt the AOA and AMAs dedication to creating more opportunities for students. This partnership was not designed to make things worse or to purposely hurt chances/ training, but it is meant to further the ability of both organizations to provide the best training for future physcicians. I support the move and hope all of this can work its way out by the time I match. All I ask is that you put students, and residents first when making decisions and never cave in to political/ financial persiflage. Oct. 16, 2015, at 8:48 am Reply
As a 1977 DO graduate and member of the Osteopathic profession who trained in an big 10 university allopathic residency program over 30 years ago, I am a firm believer that this association will strengthen our profession in the long run. I applaud the members of the governing body of the American Osteopathic Association who made this happen. Oct. 16, 2015, at 9:53 am Reply
Unfortunately newly graduating DOs will be denied surgical specialty residencies. As an otolaryngologist you just have to look at how many DOs are currently in ACGME programs. Since the AAOHNS requires the resident director to be MD trained do you think they are going to take a DO or an MD? Oct. 16, 2015, at 7:19 pm Reply
the above comment is spot on. As a DO trained general surgeon I believe that our chances to get in to the MD surgical residencies will be poor. Dec. 15, 2015, at 7:20 pm Reply