summary report expert workshop on accreditation
Experience with Accreditaion of Health Professionals’ Educaion in the
South-East Asia Region: Expert workshop
Summary Report
14-15 February 2018, Bangkok, Thailand
Background
Workshop objecives
As part of region-wide eforts to advance Universal
Health Coverage, Member States in the South-East Asia
Region have commited to a Decade of Strengthening
HRH, 2015 – 2024, with a focus on transformaive
educaion and rural retenion. Accreditaion of health
professional training insituions is one of eleven WHO
recommendaions on ways to transform and scale up
health professionals educaion and training in its 2013
educaion guidelines. This recommendaion was rated
strong despite the quality of evidence being rated low,
because high value was placed on “an uncertain but
potenially important impact on both quality and relevance
of the health workforce”. It is one of the milestones in
the new WHO Global Health Workforce Strategy 2030:
“by 2020 all countries have established accreditaion
mechanism for health training insituions”.
1. Clarify the concept, purpose and scope of
accreditaion of health training insituions, and review
internaional experience.
2. Exchange knowledge, and experience with progress
and challenges in implementaion of accreditaion of
health professionals’ educaion in SEAR;
3. Idenify ways overcoming the challenges of
the implementaion of accreditaion of health
professionals’ educaion in SEAR, through individual
and collecive acion.
16 paricipants with a wide variety of experise in
accreditaion of health professionals educaion
(academicians, representaives of nursing and medical
councils, heads of independent accreditaion bodies and
oicials from ministry of health and ministry of educaion)
from ive SEAR countries (India, Sri Lanka, Indonesia,
Thailand and Bangladesh) paricipated in this workshop.
Before atending the workshop experts completed a survey
on accreditaion for their respecive countries.
Overview of Programme
Day 1: Seing the scene; taking stock
Why this workshop on accreditaion of health
professionals’ educaion in SEAR?
What have been the progress, challenges and
impact on health professionals’ educaion
in Thailand, Indonesia, India, Sri Lanka and
Bangladesh?
What has been the experience on health
professionals’ educaion from low-mid level
income countries outside the Region? What is
their possible relevance to SEAR?
Day 2: Going forward
Group work:
What are the lessons learnt from each
other’s accreditaion systems?
What are the next steps in each country?
Regional next steps
Conclusions
Issues raised:
1. Need to be clear about diferent terms, and their
meanings
Thailand and Indonesia use the term “accreditaion”.
India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh use the term
“recogniion” for processes of review and approval
that have some similariies with accreditaion but also
signiicant diferences. Recently the term accreditaion
has increasingly been introduced in the later countries
by the Ministry of Educaion and by universiies. Despite
the diferent use of terminology a common deiniion of
accreditaion of health educaion insituions was agreed:
“A process of review and approval by an accreditaion
body for which an insituion or programme is granted
ime-limited recogniion of having met certain
established standards”
A clear disincion was also established between
accreditaion and licensing/registraion. Accreditaion
refers to insituions and programmes and licensing/
registraion to individuals.
2. Accreditaion in the ive countries
Two clear paterns on accreditaion were ideniied among
the ive countries:
Indonesia and Thailand have recently introduced
independent accreditaion bodies, recognized by law.
Sri Lanka, India and Bangladesh coninue with their
previous systems of recogniion through the health
professionals councils.
Within these two groups there are also some singulariies:
1. Indonesia: accreditaion of insituions and programmes
is carried out by two diferent independent bodies.
Accreditaion of insituions is carried out by the Naional
Accreditaion Board and accreditaion of programmes
is carried out by the Indonesia Accreditaion Agency for
Higher Educaion for Health.
Conclusions
Accreditaion is a mechanism to achieve quality in
health educaion but it is not an end in itself.
Terminology is important. “Accreditaion” is
frequently used in Thailand and Indonesia whereas
“recogniion” is frequently used in India, Sri Lanka
and Bangladesh.
Accreditaion refers to insituions and programmes
and licensing/registraion to individuals.
There are two clear paterns among the 5
countries: Indonesia and Thailand have recently
introduced independent accreditaion bodies,
whereas India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh rely on
health professional councils for recogniion.
Accreditaion should not be limited to medicine
and nursing but to other health professions.
2. Thailand: accreditaion of insituions and programmes is
carried out by the same independent body (Insitute for
Medical Educaion Accreditaion).
3. India: in addiion to the health professionals councils
there is a Naional Assessment and Accreditaion
Council (NAAC) under Ministry of Research. Only a few
health educaion insituions have gone through the
accreditaion process since it is voluntary.
4. Bangladesh: it is in the process of passing a bill to create
a University accrediing agency and has also drated an
act to create and independent accreditaion body for
accreditaion of health programmes.
5. Sri Lanka is not in the process of developing an
independent accreditaion agency yet.
Next steps:
1. Analyse experience with accreditaion systems in other SEAR countries:
a. Include one session on accreditaion during the SEAR HRH meeing to be held in June.
b. Include one whole day session on accreditaion during the AAAH meeing in Vietnam (November 2018).
2. Include accreditaion in the 2018 report on progress of the Decade for Strengthening HRH.
3. Facilitate exchange of experiences among countries:
a. Produce a paper on accreditaion in SEAR by end of 2018.
b. Provide good quality support when requested.
(i) Paricipants as a network. Thailand and Indonesia can provide good technical support and share their
experience with other SEAR countries.
4. WFME standards should be shaped to fully relect country context (Sri Lanka to review WFME standards from a PHC
perspecive).
5. SEARAME execuive meeing will be held in May 2018. Include accreditaion in the agenda for further discussion.
South-East Asia Region: Expert workshop
Summary Report
14-15 February 2018, Bangkok, Thailand
Background
Workshop objecives
As part of region-wide eforts to advance Universal
Health Coverage, Member States in the South-East Asia
Region have commited to a Decade of Strengthening
HRH, 2015 – 2024, with a focus on transformaive
educaion and rural retenion. Accreditaion of health
professional training insituions is one of eleven WHO
recommendaions on ways to transform and scale up
health professionals educaion and training in its 2013
educaion guidelines. This recommendaion was rated
strong despite the quality of evidence being rated low,
because high value was placed on “an uncertain but
potenially important impact on both quality and relevance
of the health workforce”. It is one of the milestones in
the new WHO Global Health Workforce Strategy 2030:
“by 2020 all countries have established accreditaion
mechanism for health training insituions”.
1. Clarify the concept, purpose and scope of
accreditaion of health training insituions, and review
internaional experience.
2. Exchange knowledge, and experience with progress
and challenges in implementaion of accreditaion of
health professionals’ educaion in SEAR;
3. Idenify ways overcoming the challenges of
the implementaion of accreditaion of health
professionals’ educaion in SEAR, through individual
and collecive acion.
16 paricipants with a wide variety of experise in
accreditaion of health professionals educaion
(academicians, representaives of nursing and medical
councils, heads of independent accreditaion bodies and
oicials from ministry of health and ministry of educaion)
from ive SEAR countries (India, Sri Lanka, Indonesia,
Thailand and Bangladesh) paricipated in this workshop.
Before atending the workshop experts completed a survey
on accreditaion for their respecive countries.
Overview of Programme
Day 1: Seing the scene; taking stock
Why this workshop on accreditaion of health
professionals’ educaion in SEAR?
What have been the progress, challenges and
impact on health professionals’ educaion
in Thailand, Indonesia, India, Sri Lanka and
Bangladesh?
What has been the experience on health
professionals’ educaion from low-mid level
income countries outside the Region? What is
their possible relevance to SEAR?
Day 2: Going forward
Group work:
What are the lessons learnt from each
other’s accreditaion systems?
What are the next steps in each country?
Regional next steps
Conclusions
Issues raised:
1. Need to be clear about diferent terms, and their
meanings
Thailand and Indonesia use the term “accreditaion”.
India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh use the term
“recogniion” for processes of review and approval
that have some similariies with accreditaion but also
signiicant diferences. Recently the term accreditaion
has increasingly been introduced in the later countries
by the Ministry of Educaion and by universiies. Despite
the diferent use of terminology a common deiniion of
accreditaion of health educaion insituions was agreed:
“A process of review and approval by an accreditaion
body for which an insituion or programme is granted
ime-limited recogniion of having met certain
established standards”
A clear disincion was also established between
accreditaion and licensing/registraion. Accreditaion
refers to insituions and programmes and licensing/
registraion to individuals.
2. Accreditaion in the ive countries
Two clear paterns on accreditaion were ideniied among
the ive countries:
Indonesia and Thailand have recently introduced
independent accreditaion bodies, recognized by law.
Sri Lanka, India and Bangladesh coninue with their
previous systems of recogniion through the health
professionals councils.
Within these two groups there are also some singulariies:
1. Indonesia: accreditaion of insituions and programmes
is carried out by two diferent independent bodies.
Accreditaion of insituions is carried out by the Naional
Accreditaion Board and accreditaion of programmes
is carried out by the Indonesia Accreditaion Agency for
Higher Educaion for Health.
Conclusions
Accreditaion is a mechanism to achieve quality in
health educaion but it is not an end in itself.
Terminology is important. “Accreditaion” is
frequently used in Thailand and Indonesia whereas
“recogniion” is frequently used in India, Sri Lanka
and Bangladesh.
Accreditaion refers to insituions and programmes
and licensing/registraion to individuals.
There are two clear paterns among the 5
countries: Indonesia and Thailand have recently
introduced independent accreditaion bodies,
whereas India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh rely on
health professional councils for recogniion.
Accreditaion should not be limited to medicine
and nursing but to other health professions.
2. Thailand: accreditaion of insituions and programmes is
carried out by the same independent body (Insitute for
Medical Educaion Accreditaion).
3. India: in addiion to the health professionals councils
there is a Naional Assessment and Accreditaion
Council (NAAC) under Ministry of Research. Only a few
health educaion insituions have gone through the
accreditaion process since it is voluntary.
4. Bangladesh: it is in the process of passing a bill to create
a University accrediing agency and has also drated an
act to create and independent accreditaion body for
accreditaion of health programmes.
5. Sri Lanka is not in the process of developing an
independent accreditaion agency yet.
Next steps:
1. Analyse experience with accreditaion systems in other SEAR countries:
a. Include one session on accreditaion during the SEAR HRH meeing to be held in June.
b. Include one whole day session on accreditaion during the AAAH meeing in Vietnam (November 2018).
2. Include accreditaion in the 2018 report on progress of the Decade for Strengthening HRH.
3. Facilitate exchange of experiences among countries:
a. Produce a paper on accreditaion in SEAR by end of 2018.
b. Provide good quality support when requested.
(i) Paricipants as a network. Thailand and Indonesia can provide good technical support and share their
experience with other SEAR countries.
4. WFME standards should be shaped to fully relect country context (Sri Lanka to review WFME standards from a PHC
perspecive).
5. SEARAME execuive meeing will be held in May 2018. Include accreditaion in the agenda for further discussion.