MEETING ACCREDITATION COMMITTEE
MINUTES
Date
Time
Venue
Present
:
:
:
:
8 May 2015
14.30 - 17.30
Sheraton Bratislava Hotel (Slovakia)
H. Danuser, K. German (Chairman), J. Jepsen, M. Jievaltas, S. Müller,
A. Petřik, E. Štarolis
B. Adamczyk (EU-ACME Office), J. Vásquez (ESRU)
Invitees
: K. Verbert & C. Rossi (Imengine)
Absent
: L. Campos Pinheiro, T. Parpala, K. Walsh
EBU Office : P. van Aalten (minutes)
1. Opening & Welcome
K. German opens the meeting at 14.30 hours and welcomes the attendees. Especially
J. Jepsen and J. Vásquez who attend the ACC-meeting for the first time and K. Verbert and
C. Rossi who are invited to present EBU-Medbook.
2. Minutes Accreditation Committee meeting 10 October 2014
The minutes are approved as an accurate record. There are no issues arising from the
minutes.
3. Online EBU Curriculum / MedbookTM
K. German mentions that issues as languages, controllability, liability, owner of the data and
confidentially need to be discussed.
Clarification:
- Blue version EBU-Medbook: used by residents.
- Green version EBU-Medbook: used by supervisors.
- Red version EBU-Medbook: administration version used by the EBU office.
K. Verbert explains that the resident (user) is owner of the data. When the resident signs up,
it is mandatory to tick the box “I authorise EBU to consult my details.
The EBU has limited access to the user’s data.
EBU-Medbook automatically backs up the data in the cloud on a secured server. A. Petřík
mentions that the safety of the system is essential: Imengine will install a safety log in the
blue version of EBU-Medbook.
J. Vásquez remarks that EBU-Medbook is basically based on surgical skills and there is no
way to assess sub skills. Also the possibility of a final assessment through EBU-Medbook
should be possible. How can EBU-Medbook be adapted to each individual country?
K. German would like to have the software adapted suitable for ongoing clinical practise so
that EBU-Medbook can also be used by practicing urologists. K. Verbert explains that this is
work in progress. It should be discussed which skills the EBU want to have activated. The 14
core procedures are incorporated. Basically all items can be added and software can be
adapted to the needs of EBU. K. Verbert emphasises that new adaptions, features, etc. on
behalf of EBU- Medbook will not affect the fee.
1
K. Verbert demonstrates EBU-Medbook from a resident’s (“blue version”) and a reviewer’s
(“green version”) perspective. After 5 years, users of the blue version will receive an e-mail
from Medbook asking if they want to continue with the green version.
OSATS (Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills):
-The supervisor does not need to sign-off each new procedure immediately; this can be
done when the resident requests an evaluation, or when the supervisor receives an
automated monthly sign-off reminder.
- OSATS can also be evaluated based on a score system.
- The resident decides who has access to his/her EBU-Medbook.
- The purpose of the field “satisfaction of assessor” is discussed. According to S. Müller it will
lead to more interaction between the resident and the supervisor.
CME-points:
- In Belgium the CME-points are automatically registered in Medbook.
- Splitting national and international points is possible.
Mobile app:
An iPhone-APP is available; scanning and directly uploading is possible. Directly importing
pictures taken with an iPhone in Medbook is work in progress.
In the green version of EBU-Medbook the urologist can keep a record of the complications.
In the (near) future governments will ask for those numbers. Regarding safety the question is
of these statistics should be registered in EBU-Medbook, or on a hospital level. Most likely
hospital data will also move to a cloud in the near future. J. Vásquez remarks that a field
should be added to fill in the rate or level of incontinence. K. German remarks that it would
indeed be useful to have a “yes” and “no” box and to leave it up to the user to fill it in or not.
A. Petřík remarks that on a national level you need to identify the case by noting the patient’s
name and date of birth. K. Verbert answers that the “remarks” field is not meant for this and
he shows how this is done in Medbook developed for Anaesthetists.
S. Müller informs the ACC-Committee that with the support of the German Urological
Associations he managed to get full sponsorship for the German version of the EBUMedbook for 5 years for incoming German residents as of October 2015. One of the
consequences is that if residents use it, also the head of the department must start using it.
EBU-Medbook might be a useful tool for the Czech as it is likely that in the near future more
numbers of procedures need to be recorded. A. Petřik foresees that the Czech Urological
Association will be prepared to pay the EBU-Medbook fees for the Czech residents.
According to J. Vásquez and J. Jepsen new Danish residents are obliged to keep an online
logbook starting this year. There are ± 12 residents a year; urology training is 6 years, no
exit exam. At the end of the residency the logbook must be submitted to the Ministry; after
verification the resident will receive the licence.
They think that financing of EBU-Medbook will not be a problem.
M. Jievaltas and E. Štarolis from Lithuania assume that the financing will not raise any
problems for their 4-5 residents.
2
4. UEMS-EACCME
4.1. The Accreditation of e-Learning Materials by the EACCME
The UEMS recognises that considerable advances are being made in the methodologies by
which CME and CPD can be provided, and by which these educational opportunities are
accessed by doctors. For this reason, the UEMS provides for the accreditation by the
EACCME of new media (“e-Learning materials”) for the delivery of e-CME/e-CPD.
In the letter “UEMS 2011/20” the EACCME describes the criteria and mechanisms for its
accreditation of e-Learning materials. The criteria are divided in 59 subdivisions.
The example is taken of the ESOT (European Society for Organ Transplantation) which
has developed an educational platform. According to the EACCME, ESOT is the provider
and can therefore not perform the accreditation. The issue of programme accreditation
versus provider accreditation (not offered by EACCME) requires further investigation.
About 5 e-Learning activities need to be accredited per year. Although it takes time to get
acquainted with the evaluation procedure it is decided that all committee members are
involved in this procedure. B. Adamczyk will randomly appoint a committee members; the
assigned committee member informs the EBU office within 1-2 days if he/she is able to
evaluate the activity within the deadline (1 week); otherwise another member will be chosen.
4.2. UEMS Advisory Council on Continuing Medical Education meeting 29-11-2014
B. Adamczyk attended the meeting; she informs the committee about the highlights:
- In 2015 the UEMS Governance Board on CME/CPD will enable its members and providers
to comment on revisions and the new criteria regarding Live Educational Events.
- To assess the independence of the scientific programme, National Accreditation Authorities
consider on-site visits carried out by the UEMS Sections are the most reliable way.
- The EACCME will explore the issue of accreditation of international peer-reviewed articles.
The challenge will be the recognition by the National Accreditation Authorities.
- The accreditation system in The Netherlands is still national. The EACCME will explore the
potential to have an agreement signed with the EACCME.
- The EACCME accepts separate applications for accreditation but the participants cannot
claim double credits. The EACCME accredits maximum 3 credits for a half-day and 6 credits
for a full day. This is defined in document UEMS 2012/30; EACCME is willing to review this
in the light of experience. Although the course-organiser can advise a number of credit
points, the EBU will assign credit points based on the scientific programme and the
EACCME takes the final decision.
4.3 My EU-ACME on www.eu-acme.org
B. Adamczyk sees possibilities for connecting the CME-database with EBU-Medbook in
the future.
A. Petřik mentions that collecting credits in Czech Republic is not mandatory; the Czech
Medical Chamber only obliges Department Heads to submit an overview of credit points.
5. Any other business
EBU logbook: M. Müller mentions that the Executive Committee discussed the EBU paper
logbook; this logbook must be submitted for the EBU Oral Examination and needs updating.
Some candidates already sent in a copy the electronic EBU-logbook which will be replaced
by Medbook in due course. Making EBU-Medbook obligatory for the EBU Oral Examination
in the future may be discussed by the Executive Committee.
Next meeting: Friday 9 October 2015 in Bruges (Belgium).
6. Closing
K. German thanks the attendees for their contribution and closes the meeting at 17.00 hours.
3