Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_2725_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
31.08.2026
Размер:
31 Мб
Скачать
American Board ofFamily Medicine’s Commitment toResidency Education: Advancing Excellence
GeraldFetter andWarrenNewton
2
Key Points
• The American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) is committed to the powerful evidence that family physi­cians are essential to improving the population’s health in the United States, enhancing the patient’s care experi­ence, reducing cost and advancing health equity.
• The ABFM and family medicine residency program directors have substantial experience working together to improve residency training and deliver high quality health care through continuous quality improvement, innova­tion, continuing professional development, and research.
• While the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) oversees the accreditation of resi­dency programs, the ABFM sets standards for ensuring that individual residents meet eligibility requirements for board certication.
• Family medicine residency program directors must ensure that ABFM requirements are met in order for a resident trainee to be eligible for board certication.
• The ABFM has adopted expectations for competency­based board certication eligibility using twelve Core Outcomes.
• Residency learning networks, sometimes known as a community of practice or learning collaboratives, are resources to help residency programs engage in continu­ous quality improvement.
G. Fetter (*) American Board of Family Medicine, Lexington, KY, USA
Association of Family Medicine Residency Directors (AFMRD), Leawood, KS, USA
American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), Leawood, KS, USA e-mail: JFetter@theabfm.org
W. Newton American Board of Family Medicine, Lexington, KY, USA
UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
• The Family Medicine Advancing Innovation in Residency Education (FM AIRE) initiative is a learning collabora­tive designed to test fundamental residency and care delivery innovations including time variable training, care delivery redesign, competency-based medical education, and promotion of clinical excellence.
• To assist programs in assessing the impact of their train­ing, the ABFM is partnering with the Association of Family Medicine Residency Directors (AFMRD) to administer a centralized graduate survey of ABFM diplo­mates 3 years after graduation.
• Family medicine residency program directors must be procient with using the resources available on the ABFM website and the Residency Training Management (RTM) System, a secure portal that serves as an operational hub for information exchange between residency programs and the ABFM.
• The program director must attest to the ABFM when each resident has successfully completed their residency pro­gram and that the resident is competent in dened out­comes representing specic components of readiness for autonomous practice.
The American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) is com­mitted to the powerful evidence that family medicine physi­cians are essential to improving our nation’s population health, enhancing the care experience, reducing costs, and advancing health equity. The ABFM’s mission since its inception in 1969 has been devoted to improving the health of the public through board certication, residency training, research, leadership development, and promoting the devel­opment of the specialty of Family Medicine. This chapter will describe fundamental concepts and provide background information to help program directors and faculty ensure trainees are eligible for board certication, engage in con­tinuous improvement and residency training innovation, and shape future training standards.
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2025 R. Kellerman, G. Irwin (eds.), Graduate Medical Education in Family Medicine, Excellence in Medical Education 2,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-70741-4_2
11
12
G. Fetter and W. Newton
The ABFM and family medicine residency program directors have substantial experience working together to improve residency training and deliver high-quality health care through continuous quality improvement, innovation, continuing professional development, and research [15]. Past residency redesign initiatives such as Preparing the Personal Physician for Practice (P4), I3 Population Health Collaborative, Family Medicine National Innovation in Continuity Clinic Experience (FM-NICCE), Length of Training (LoT) pilot, and Shaping GME: Future of Family Medicine Summit have generated an important evidence base and community perspective on which to draw for devel­oping additional family medicine residency redesign concepts.
Why Is ABFM Involved inResidency Education?
Educational and clinical experiences in residency have a powerful impact on a resident’s preparation for autonomous clinical practice and future careers. While the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) over­sees the accreditation of residency programs, the ABFM sets standards for ensuring that individual residents meet eligibil­ity requirements for Board Certication. Program directors must ensure that those requirements are met in order for a trainee to be eligible for Board Certication. The fundamen­tal purpose of the family medicine residency director is to lead a high-quality residency training program that prepares graduates to be competent, condent, and accountable topatients, the practice of full scope family medicine, and the communities in which they will practice. Like the pro­gram director, the ABFM plays a critical role in ensuring the competence of family physicians through its certication process, quality improvement activities, and educational standards.
Residency Design inFamily Medicine
Family medicine itself has long been rooted in reforming and transforming the healthcare system for the benet of patients. However, the structure of today’s family medicine residency programs still follows a decades-old model, even as US healthcare reaches another critical juncture, with health out­comes lagging far behind other developed countries. Well­trained personal family physicians can play a major role in healing both the healthcare system and communities. There is considerable momentum in the family medicine residency community to propose, study, and chart new pathways for residency education and clinical care delivery by engaging in a period of scaled residency redesign. Residency programs
must prepare family medicine residents to meet the changing healthcare needs of their patients and communities [6].

Residency Redesign

For more than a decade, the ABFM has led and collaborated with program directors to make innovative changes in clini­cal care and education. Examples include advancements in measuring GME outcomes, time variable training, residency learning networks, resident assessment, and the “practice is the curriculum” initiative. With the adoption of the 2023 ACGME family medicine residency program requirements, there are many new specications required of family medi­cine training programs including a signicant shift to com­petency based medical education (CBME) and, with it, the need for additional direct observation of resident learners and provision of actionable feedback (Table2.1).
These changes have necessitated the ABFM to use new approaches to evaluate board certicationeligibility. To that end, the ABFM has adopted expectations for competency­based board certication eligibility using 12 Core Outcomes (Table2.2). These Outcomes represent a commitment to the public regarding what they should expect from a board­certied family physician [7].
Another residency design imperative for a program direc­tor is to engage in program self-study and build relationships with other program directors and faculty to swap knowledge in a longitudinal supportive community of peers that can meet regularly, in person and virtually. One of the most effective ways to engage in social learning is by participating in a Residency Learning Network, sometimes known as a community of practice or learning collaborative. To that end, the ABFM Foundation provides seed funding to expand and design family medicine residency learning networks.
In 2022, the ABFM and ACGME initiated one of the most signicant residency redesign initiatives in the history of the discipline. The Family Medicine Advancing Innovation in Residency Education (FM AIRE) initiative is a learning col­laborative designed to test fundamental residency and care delivery innovations including time variable training, care delivery redesign, competency-based medical education, promotion of clinical excellence, and inviting family medi­cine residencies to develop training models that positively impact society. This initiative emerged from earlier resi­dency redesign studies that showed positive evidence for longer length of training though the projects were not suf­ciently scaled to merit specialty-wide changes to length of training accreditation requirements [8]. FM AIRE is note­worthy for its aim to attract at least 10% of family medicine residency programs to participate in the 5–8year-long study meant to inform future program accreditation requirements. To learn how your program may participate or view learn-
2 American Board ofFamily Medicine’s Commitment toResidency Education: Advancing Excellence
13
Table 2.1 Van Melle framework for competency-based medical edu­cation [13]
Component Description An outcomes-
based competency framework Progressive sequencing of competencies
Learning experiences tailored to competencies in CBME
Teaching tailored to competencies
Programmatic assessment (i.e., Program of Assessment)
Desired outcomes of training are identied based on societal needs. Outcomes are paramount so that the graduate functions as an effective health professional. In competency-based medical education (CBME), competencies and their developmental markers must be explicitly sequenced to support learner progression from novice to master clinicians. Sequencing must consider that some competencies form building blocks for the development of further competence. Progression is not always a smooth, predictable curve. Time is a resource, not a driver or criterion. Learning experiences should be sequenced in a way that supports the progression of competence. There must be exibility to accommodate variation in individual learner progression. Learning experiences should resemble the practice environment. Learning experiences should be carefully selected to enable the acquisition of one or many abilities. Most learning experiences should be tied to an essential graduate ability. Clinical teaching emphasizes learning through experience and application, not just knowledge acquisition. Teachers use coaching techniques to diagnose a learner in a clinical situation and give actionable feedback. Teaching is responsive to individual learner needs. Learners are actively engaged in determining their learning needs. Teachers and learners coproduce learning. There are multiple points and methods for data collection. Methods for data collection match the quality of the competency being assessed. Emphasis is on workplace-based assessment. Emphasis is on providing personalized, timely, meaningful feedback. Progression is based on entrustment. There is a robust system for decision-making. Good assessment requires attention to issues of implicit and explicit bias that can adversely affect the assessment process.
ings from the initiative visit the FM AIRE website at www.
fmaire.org.
The specialty-specic family medicine and common Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirements call for residency programs to become progressively sophisticated at measuring trainee outcomes. Increasingly, there is recognition that true out­come measures of GME must incorporate performance after
Table 2.2 Core outcomes for family medicine residency training [7]
Number Description 1 Develop effective communication and constructive
relationships with patients, clinical teams, and consultants.
2 Practice as personal physicians, providing rst-contact
access, comprehensive, and continuity medical care for people of all ages in multiple settings and coordinate care by helping patients navigate a complex healthcare system.
3 Provide preventive care that improves wellness, modies
risk factors for illness and injury, and detects illness in early, treatable stages for people of all ages while supporting patients’ values and preferences.
4 Evaluate, diagnose, and manage patients with
undifferentiated symptoms, chronic medical conditions, and multiple comorbidities.
5 Diagnose and manage common mental health conditions
in people of all ages.
6 Diagnose and manage acute illness and injury for people
of all ages in the emergency room or hospital.
7 Perform the procedures most frequently needed by
patients in continuity and hospital practices.
8 Care for low-risk patients in prenatal care, labor and
delivery, and post-partum settings.
9 Effectively lead, manage, and participate in teams that
provide care and improve outcomes for the diverse
populations and communities they serve. 10 Model lifelong learning and engage in self-reection. 11 Assess priorities of care for individual patients across the
continuum of care—in-ofce visits, emergency, hospital,
and other settings, balancing the preferences of patients,
medical priorities, and setting of care. 12 Model professionalism and be trustworthy for patients,
peers, and communities.
residency to evaluate whether training goals are accom­plished as graduates enter their practice.
The ABFM is partnering with the Association of Family Medicine Residency Directors (AFMRD) to administer a centralized graduate survey of ABFM diplomates 3 years after graduation. The survey results will assist programs in assessing the impact of their training. Once data are col­lected, they are aggregated at the program level and shared with each residency program, along with national compari­son data, via the ABFM Resident Training Management (RTM) portal. This information will be particularly useful for each program’s continuous improvement process and help meet ACGME requirements for self-study by informing Annual Program Evaluation (APE) and Program Evaluation Committee meetings.
In addition, the ABFM and AFMRD have created the Strengthening Outcomes and Assessment in Residency (SOAR) Community of Practice [9, 10]. Using data from the graduate survey and other sources, each residency can deter­mine at what level it is accomplishing its mission and goals. For example, for residencies with a mission to produce phy­sicians for underserved rural communities, graduate practice addresses are geocoded and classied based on Health
14
G. Fetter and W. Newton
Professional Shortage Area designations, allowing the pro­gram to assess whether it is or is not meeting its rural-focused mission. Residencies with a strong procedural or obstetrics focus can track if their graduates are applying these skills in practice. This outcome data is fundamental to shaping how our residency programs adapt and innovate to meet the needs of the public. Live and virtual residency community events will be used to share exemplary practices.
Working withABFM
The ABFM maintains specic content and detailed residency standards on its website and in the Residency Training Management (RTM) System. Program directors must attest that each resident has completed the residency program, ful­lled all necessary requirements, and demonstrated readi­ness for autonomous practice to be eligible for board certication [11].
It is essential that the new program director become familiar with the ABFM Residency Training Management (RTM) System, a secure portal that serves as an operational hub for information exchange between the residency pro­gram and ABFM. This portal includes a wide variety of information and is the primary point of contact between the residency program and ABFM.The RTM contains detailed information about the Family Medicine Certication Entry Process, the In-Training Examination (ITE), an ITE Score Results Handbook and Bayesian Score Predictor, Knowledge Self-Assessment (KSA) modules, advanced placement credit for prior training, and the verication/attestation process for resident completion of boardcerticationeligibility require­ments. The RTM includes important functionality like add­ing new residents, viewing updated ABFM policies, viewing resident-level reports such as ITE scores, subscribing to alerts, and password management. The ABFM In-Training Examination (ITE) and Score Results Handbook, are useful for gauging a resident’s academic progress and working with them to build individualized learning plans. The RTM sys­tem facilitates the process of issuing advanced placement credit for prior training in another specialty. All resident leaves of absence must be recorded in RTM, regardless of whether a training extension is required.
As a requirement for Board Eligibility, each June, the pro­gram director is asked to attest that each resident has com­pleted their residency and that they are competent in dened outcomes representing specic components of readiness for autonomous practice [12].
The program director has a critical role in preparing the family physician workforce and is vital to shaping the future
of the residency program, the success of its mission, and the responsiveness of family medicine to the public. The ABFM works to ensure that the program director is successful in their endeavors.

References

1. Newton WP, Bazemore A, Magill M, Mitchell K, Peterson L, Phillips RL. The future of family medicine residency training is our future: a call for dialogue across our community. J Am Board Fam Med. 2020;33(4):636–40. https://doi.org/10.3122/
jabfm.2020.04.200275.
2. Newton WP, Baxley EG. Preparing the personal physician for practice: what we’ve learned and where we need to go. Fam Med. 2018;50(7):499–500. https://doi.org/10.22454/
fammed.2018.398588.
3. Cole S, Fetter J, Oliver MG. Soaring to new heights: strength­ening outcomes and assessment in residency. Ann Fam Med. 2023;21(2):197–8. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2974. PMID: 36973049; PMCID: PMC10042569.
4. Newton W, Fetter G, Hoekzema GS, Hughes L, Magill M. Residency learning networks: why and how. Ann Fam Med. 2022;20(5):492–4. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2885. Epub 2022 Sep 2. PMID: 36228077; PMCID: PMC9512554.
5. Carney PA, Ericson A, Conry C, Martin JC, Douglass AB, Eiff MP. Measuring clinical preparedness after residency training: development of a new instrument. Fam Med. 2024;56(1):16–23.
https://doi.org/10.22454/fammed.2023.973082.
6. Newton WP, Magill M.It takes a village to redesign residencies. J Am Board Fam Med. 2022;35(2):445–8. https://doi.org/10.3122/
jabfm.2022.02.220067.
7. Newton W, Cagno CK, Hoekzema GS, Edje L. Core out­comes of residency training 2022 (provisional). Ann Fam Med. 2023;21(2):191–4. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2977. Epub 2023 Mar 2. PMID: 36863777; PMCID: PMC10042560.
8. ACGME Advancing innovation in residency education: an ACGME-ABFM collaboration. n.d. Retrieved January 4, 2024, from https://www.acgme.org/globalassets/pfassets/programre-
sources/aire- proposal- 12.13.21.nal.pdf
9. Strengthening Outcomes and Assessment in Residency. 2024. Retrieved January 4, 2024. https://www.annfammed.org/content/
annalsfm/21/2/197.full.pdf
10. Coutinho AJ, Levin Z, Petterson S, Phillips RL Jr, Peterson LE. Residency program characteristics and individual physician practice characteristics associated with family physician scope of practice. Acad Med. 2019;94(10):1561–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/
ACM.0000000000002838.
11. Cole SZ, Olmos KEM.From AFMRD: who to go to for what: the ABFM or the ACGME.Ann Fam Med. 2022;20(2):182–5. https://
doi.org/10.1370/afm.2779.
12. Newton W, Magill M, Barr W, Hoekzema G, Karuppiah S, Studzman K.Implementing competency based ABFM board eligi­bility. J Am Board Fam Med. 2023;36:703. https://doi.org/10.3122/
jabfm.2023.230201R0.
13. Van Melle E, Frank JR, Holmboe ES, Dagnone D, Stockley D, Sherbino J. International competency-based medical educa­tion collaborators. A core components framework for evaluating implementation of competency-based medical education pro­grams. Acad Med. 2019;94(7):1002–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/
ACM.0000000000002743.
American College ofOsteopathic Family Physicians: Osteopathic Postgraduate Medical Education inFamily Medicine
ThomasN.Told, RobDano, KennethA.Heiles, andShirleyL.Sharp
3
Key Points
• The essence of the Single Accreditation Agreement was that the graduate osteopathic medical accreditation activi­ties of the AOA would stop on June 30, 2020, and the ACGME would manage all GME accreditation activities from that time forward.
• Osteopathic Recognition is a formal designation awarded by ACGME’s Osteopathic Recognition Committee.
• Osteopathic Recognition is open to all ACGME­accredited programs regardless of specialty.
• It is critical for all residents wishing to sit for the certica­tion boards in Family Medicine and Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment (OMT) to have a rm foundation in OPP and OMT.
• The Director of Osteopathic Education must have experi­ence in education, administrative skills, and requisite osteopathic expertise and experience.
• Osteopathic faculty members are expected to present at national, regional, and state meetings and local grand rounds, publish, and provide leadership specic to OPP.
• Each Osteopathic Recognition designated program must have at least one designated osteopathic resident per pro­gram year averaged over 3years.
T. N. Told (*) Rocky Vista University-Utah, Ivins, UT, USA e-mail: ttold@rvu.edu
R. Danoff Sidney Kimmel Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA e-mail: robert.danoff@jefferson.edu
K. A. Heiles Kansas City University-Joplin, Joplin, MO, USA e-mail: Kheiles@kansascity.edu
S. L. Sharp Family and Community Medicine Residency, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA e-mail: Shsharp@augusta.edu
• Osteopathic Recognition Milestones must be one of the tools used to determine and ensure that osteopathic resi­dents are able to practice without supervision upon gradu­ating from the residency program.
• The residency program must maintain a pass rate of 80% or higher for their rst-time takers on certifying examina­tions administered by the American Board of Osteopathic Family Physicians (AOBFP).
• The AOA has board certication authority for 16 main osteopathic certifying boards covering 27 primary spe­cialties and 48 sub-specialties.
A Historic Decision: TheSingle Accreditation System
By offering the DO and MD degrees, America is the only country that has two fully accredited terminal medical degree pathways leading to the unlimited practice of medicine. Though it was the strong desire of the founder of osteopathic medicine, Andrew Taylor Still MD, to have his osteopathic philosophy of practice embraced as an extra diagnostic and therapeutic tool by all of organized medicine, that hope was quickly condemned and rejected by the medical establish­ment of his day.
For more than 105years following the Flexner Report in
1910, allopathic and osteopathic medicine would develop separate schools, hospitals, and postgraduate education pro­grams using most of the same educational standards. Both formed separate accrediting organizations, state licensure boards, and licensing examinations to support and validate that their graduates were qualied to be licensed for the unrestricted practice of medicine [1].
In 2014, the American Association of Colleges of
Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM) and the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) faced growing pressure to solve two issues that evaded profession-wide attempts over the years to mitigate successfully.
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2025 R. Kellerman, G. Irwin (eds.), Graduate Medical Education in Family Medicine, Excellence in Medical Education 2,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-70741-4_3
15
16
T. N. Told et al.
First, was the rapidly growing osteopathic student popula­tion driven by the development of new colleges of osteo­pathic medicine. Many of these colleges established satellite campuses, often of equal size to the home campus [1, 2]. The growth of osteopathic colleges had previously been con­trolled by the number of osteopathic hospitals that offered graduate medical education training opportunities. However, there has been a slow progressive loss of osteopathic hospi­tals since 1969 when hospital corporations began buying them up and either closing them or converting them to allo­pathic hospitals. This trend continued up to 2012 when the last osteopathic medical center was purchased in Pontiac, Michigan. Clinical education for osteopathic students and residents had adapted to this loss by slowly moving training opportunities to community hospitals and hospital networks that were oftentimes near areas of socioeconomic need where many osteopathic colleges were located [3].
Second, was the long-standing invitation from the American Medical Association (AMA), also dating back to 1969, that welcomed all osteopathic physicians as members into the organization. Osteopathic school graduates were then eligible to train and certify in AMA-accredited resi­dency programs and fellowships. This practice would con­tinue after the AMA residency accreditation process was transferred to the ACGME in 1981. Though strongly opposed by the AOA membership, invitations to train in allopathically accredited residency programs were accepted by a growing number of osteopathic school graduates who desired a greater variety of residency and fellowship choices than those available through the AOA.By 2014 more than half of osteopathic graduates each year were training in ACGME programs. A large number of graduates of those ACGME- accredited residency programs went on to certify with the member boards of the American Board of Medical Specialists (ABMS), such as the American Board of Family Medicine, rather than the AOA.Many of these graduates did not rejoin the AOA or its specialty organizations after receiving ABMS certication, resulting in an alarming loss of young physicians from osteopathic societies and organizations.
In 2014, the ACGME was confronted with problems of a different nature that would make the organization more open to outside collaboration with the AOA.
First, was a surplus of unlled residency positions espe­cially in needed specialties like family medicine. There were not enough USMD graduates to ll all available ACGME­accredited residency positions. Graduates of osteopathic col­leges were lling the open positions and applying to family medicine and other primary care residency programs in greater numbers every year [3].
The second issue arose in 2011 when the ACGME began instituting a major change in their accreditation framework known as the Next Accreditation System (NAS). In short, the
NAS continued to allow graduates of non-Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) member schools to enter ACGME-accredited programs for residency training, but the NAS requirements explicitly barred those same graduates from entering fellowship training in ACGME-accredited sub-specialties. This negatively impacted a signicant num­ber of ACGME residency graduates, particularly DO’s and international medical graduates, who were not graduates of LCME-accredited schools. Osteopathic graduates from both AOA-accredited residencies and ACGME-accredited resi­dencies who wished to enter subspecialty training were most impacted by the NAS requirement.
This would be the development that brought an immedi­ate request from the AOA for an emergency meeting with the ACGME to resolve this problem as quickly as possible. From that meeting, the ACGME, AOA, and AACOM would form a task force composed of members from all three orga­nizations to come up with a mutually agreeable solution. The ACGME would be the organization that proposed the nal resolution to the problem. It would be an innovative and truly historic Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) outlining a plan proposing that all three organizations agree to combine the accreditation activities of the ACGME and AOA into a Single GME Accreditation System (SAS). The ACGME agreed to pause implementation of the NAS to allow a mutu­ally agreed upon transition process to roll out over a 5-year period starting July 2015. At the same time, osteopathic graduate medical education accreditation activities of the AOA would stop by June 30, 2020. The ACGME would then manage all the accreditation activities from that time forward for all MD and DO medical school graduates entering Graduate Medical Education (GME) residency programs in the United States [4].
In return the AOA and AACOM would gain the following:
• The AOA and AACOM would become member organiza-
tions of the ACGME and occupy four seats each on the
ACGME Board of Directors.
• The AOA would serve as a Nominating Organization to
the Review Committees (RC) of the ACGME.
• The ACGME would begin accrediting the formerly AOA-
accredited specialty of Osteopathic Neuromusculoskeletal
Medicine and establish a Review Committee to oversee
the process.
• The ACGME would create an application system for
Osteopathic Recognition available to all ACGME-
accredited residencies and fellowships interested in pro-
moting the education of residents in Osteopathic
Principles and Practice (OPP) and Osteopathic
Manipulative Treatment (OMT). The ACGME would also
create an Osteopathic Recognition Committee to oversee
this process.
3 American College ofOsteopathic Family Physicians: Osteopathic Postgraduate Medical Education inFamily Medicine
17
• ACGME senior leadership would include a Senior Vice President, Osteopathic Accreditation position to oversee all osteopathic GME [5].

Osteopathic Recognition Requirements

The following is an overview of essential points about the process for obtaining Osteopathic Recognition. The full text of the Osteopathic Recognition Requirements can be found by querying the following link https://www.acgme.org/glo-
balassets/pfassets/programrequirements/801_ osteopathicrecognition_2021v2.pdf on the ACGME website
[4].
Osteopathic Recognition is a formal designation awarded
by the ACGME’s Osteopathic Recognition Committee. It is open to all ACGME-accredited programs regardless of spe­cialty through a formal application process. Osteopathic Recognition preserves osteopathic distinctiveness by provid­ing requisite education on the understanding and use of OPP.The educational curriculum must cover the philosophi­cal and practical approaches to diagnosis and treatment based on the body’s self-healing and self-regulatory mecha­nisms. In addition, Osteopathic Recognition designated resi­dency programs must provide hands-on manual skills training in OMT. Residents can use OMT to enhance their palpation skills which, in turn, will improve their ability to diagnose musculoskeletal dysfunctions and identify the visceral- somatic reexes that accompany many disease pro­cesses. OMT techniques can be used to treat or modify those disease processes.
The four core tenets of osteopathic medicine are:
• The body is a unit; the person is a unit of mind, body, and spirit.
• The body is capable of self-regulation, self-healing, and health maintenance.
• Structure and function are reciprocally interrelated.
• Rational treatment is based on an understanding of the basic principles of body unity, self-regulation, and the interrelationship of structure and function.
The Osteopathic Recognition program teaches how to
apply these tenets to clinical diagnosis and treatment in order to enhance the quality and delivery of holistic patient care.
Graduates of osteopathic medical schools accredited by
the Commission on Osteopathic College Accreditation (COCA) are expected to have extensive training on OPP and OMT as a requirement for graduation. For graduates of LCME schools who have not had exposure to these founda­tional skills, there are introductory courses available through the American Osteopathic Association (including the state,
regional, and national societies of the AOA), select colleges of osteopathic medicine, and the American College of Osteopathic Family Physicians (ACOFP).
Many of the colleges of osteopathic medicine located in most regions of the country have OPP and OMT departments with dedicated faculty who can provide training or help identify local training options. These organizations can be a resource to Osteopathic Recognition designated programs by providing foundational osteopathic education materials, educational resources on osteopathic diagnosis and treatment, and guidance on assessment for determining the skill level of residents [6].

Osteopathic Recognition Program Essential Personnel

Accredited residency programs with Osteopathic Recognition may have as many qualied osteopathic faculty as needed to adequately supervise and teach their residents. However, no program can have fewer than two osteopathically qualied faculty members to oversee the Osteopathic Recognition designated residents enrolled in the program. One of the two can be the Director of Osteopathic Education (DOE).
Having a DOE and at least one other designated osteo­pathic faculty member is a core ACGME requirement for Osteopathic Recognition.
Director ofOsteopathic Education
The Director of Osteopathic Education (DOE) must have experience in education, administrative skills and, above all else, requisite osteopathic expertise and experience that is acceptable to the Osteopathic Recognition Committee. The Director must be certied by an AOA specialty certifying board [such as the American Osteopathic Board of Family Physicians (AOBFP] or possess similar board certication as approved by the Osteopathic Recognition Committee. The DOE may also be the director of the residency program or be another member of the residency program faculty.
The duties of the DOE include the following:
• Administer and maintain an educational environment
conducive to educating residents in OPP, OMT, and the
ACGME Core Competencies.
• Engage in professional development activity applicable to
their leadership responsibilities.
• Oversee and ensure the quality of osteopathic didactic
and clinical education at all clinical sites.
• Identify a faculty member at each site, if more than one
site, who possesses strong osteopathic knowledge and
manual skill, and designate them as a site director for des-
ignated osteopathic residents.
18
T. N. Told et al.
• Approve the selection of osteopathic faculty members.
• Meet all requirements of a faculty member.
• Prepare information and reports for submission as required by the ACGME.
• Advise residents on osteopathic professional development.
Osteopathic Faculty
The osteopathic faculty members assist the DOE in various roles and work to ensure the success of designated residents in gaining knowledge in OPP as well as developing and applying their skills in OMT. Osteopathic faculty assist in the development and delivery of the curriculum and partici­pate in the evaluation of the resident’s OMT skills to ensure that they can successfully apply their skills clinically after graduation [7].
Osteopathic faculty members are expected to present at
national, regional, and state meetings and at local grand rounds, publish, and provide leadership specic to OPP. Resident-led didactics, journal clubs, and workshops can count toward meeting these scholarly activity require­ments. They are also required to have at least one activity related to OMT skills.
Osteopathic faculty members must:
• Provide supervision during the performance of OMT to promote patient safety.
• Evaluate designated osteopathic resident’s application of OPP through direct observation.
• Be certied by an AOA specialty certifying board and/or be a physician holding a medical degree other than DO who has active board certication through an ABMS member board and has completed an ACGME-accredited residency program with Osteopathic Recognition in a designated osteopathic position [7].
• Have a current medical license.
• Annually participate in structured faculty development programs that include OPP.
• Participate in organized clinical discussions, rounds, jour­nal clubs, and conferences for designated osteopathic residents with specic integration of OPP and OMT.
• Engage with residents in order to foster and develop scholarly activity in the form of research, quality initia­tives, conference presentations, and reviews of scholarly articles. Faculty collectively must produce at least two scholarly activities per year over a 5-year period.
A faculty member’s board certication does not have to
be in the same specialty as the residency in which they teach.

Osteopathic Recognition Resident Requirements

Each Osteopathic Recognition designated program must have at least one designated osteopathic resident per pro­gram year averaged over 3years. Programs must designate which residents will formally receive osteopathic education. Programs have the responsibility to determine if the resident has sufcient background and instruction in osteopathic phi­losophy, palpatory skills, and manipulative techniques to succeed in the program. The Osteopathic Recognition desig­nated program must have a written policy that clearly out­lines the requirements for appointment into the program. The policy must be presented to applicants before they enter a designated osteopathic position.

Osteopathic Educational Program Core Competencies

The curriculum for designated osteopathic residents must inte­grate OPP and OMT into each of the six ACGME competen­cies. At rst glance, it may appear to be a daunting task to integrate OPP into each of these competencies. The Osteopathic Recognition Requirements state how OPP must be integrated into the curriculum: www.acgme.org/osteopathicrecognition There are examples available in the full text of the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document on the ACGME website:
https://www.acgme.org/globalassets/pfassets/programrequire ments/801osteopathicrecognitionfaqs.pdf [4, 7].
Osteopathic Resident andFaculty Evaluation
Each program must provide an assessment of the resident’s application of OPP and OMT manual skills in each of the ACGME competencies for osteopathically designated resi­dents. The residency’s Clinical Competency Committee (CCC) or a sub-committee of the CCC must include the Director of Osteopathic Education along with a designated osteopathic faculty member as full members.
The CCC will review all osteopathic resident evaluations semi-annually as they relate to Osteopathic Recognition Milestones. The committee or sub-committee will advise the Director of Osteopathic Education about resident progress, the potential for advancement or need for remediation or dismissal.
Formative longitudinal assessment of resident perfor­mance should be provided during clinical activities, includ­ing core clinical experiences and all other residency educational activities and must include an evaluation of the resident’s ability to integrate OPP into clinical experiences. Direct observation during clinical activities and review of
3 American College ofOsteopathic Family Physicians: Osteopathic Postgraduate Medical Education inFamily Medicine
19
clinical assessments and treatment plans are expected during an initial assessment period. The initial assessment period should last no longer than 3months.
Osteopathic Recognition Milestones must be one of the tools used to determine and ensure that the osteopathic resi­dents are able to practice without supervision upon graduat­ing from the residency program. The DOE will conduct a nal evaluation to verify successful completion of the pro­gram. The DOE will verify the resident has the knowledge, palpatory skills, interpersonal and communication skills, and ability to apply OPP in clinical practice, in order to deliver direct patient care without supervision. The nal record will include the resident’s performance in applying OPP in each of the ACGME competencies.
The Osteopathic Recognition faculty must be evaluated annually by the DOE as to their performance. This evalua­tion should include written condential feedback from the designated residents. These evaluations can occur after com­pletion of rotations or other educational experiences.

Osteopathic Program Evaluation

At least annually the designated residents and faculty must have the opportunity to evaluate the osteopathic components of the residency program in writing in a totally condential manner. The residency program must use ndings from these evaluations to improve educational content, administration, and delivery. The residency program must maintain a pass rate of 80% or higher for their rst-time takers on certifying examinations administered by the American Board of Osteopathic Family Physicians (AOBFP).
It is expected that residents who enter a designated osteo­pathic position will complete the program in that designated osteopathic position.
Osteopathic Family Medicine Initial Board Certication andMaintenance ofCertication
The previously mentioned agreement between the ACGME, AOA and AACOM was intended to unify residency accredi­tation, but not board certication. The transition to a single GME accreditation system did not combine the certication authority and processes held by the AOA with the member boards and subspecialty boards of the ABMS.The AOA did not forfeit the certication authority for its 16 main certify­ing boards covering 27 primary specialties and 48 sub­specialties within the Bureau of Osteopathic Specialists (BOS). Board certication and re-certication pathways for residents, fellows and practicing physicians in all specialties of medicine and surgery remain a dual track process [8].
Certication Examinations forOsteopathic Family Medicine [4]
The AOBFP certication examination has two parts: a writ­ten (cognitive) exam and an OMT performance (practical) exam. Osteopathic family medicine board certication is carried out by the American Osteopathic Board of Family Physicians (ABOFP) which offers two primary certications listed below:
Family Medicine and Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment (FM/OMT):
– This certication pathway is available to family medi-
cine residents who graduated from a Commission on Osteopathic College Accreditation (COCA) accredited college of osteopathic medicine, and who completed a 3-year ACGME-accredited family medicine residency.
– To be eligible for the OMT Performance (practical)
Exam, a requirement for FM/OMT certication, non­DOs must have [1] completed the osteopathic educa­tional requirements in an ACGME-accredited family medicine program with Osteopathic Recognition; or [2] have completed 50hours of training in Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine as approved by AOBFP. https://
aoacbs.wpenginepowered.com/family- physicians/wp­content/uploads/sites/25/50- Hour- OMT- Requirement. pdf
Family Medicine:
– This certication is available to those graduates of
COCA accredited colleges of osteopathic medicine who have completed an ACGME approved family medicine residency program with or without Osteopathic Recognition who choose not to sit for the OMT certication portion of the examination.
– This certication is available to physicians who gradu-
ated from a LCME-accredited medical school or a medical school outside of the United States with a valid ECFMG certicate who have completed an ACGME approved family medicine residency pro­gram with or without Osteopathic Recognition.
All diplomates certied by AOBFP in Family Medicine
may return anytime at a later date to sit for the Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment (OMT) certication examination.
American Osteopathic Board ofFamily Physicians (AOBFP) In-Service Examinations [9]
The AOBFP In-Service Exam (ISE) is an examination pro­duced and administered by the American College of Osteopathic Family Physicians (ACOFP). It is a formative
20
T. N. Told et al.
examination that fullls ACGME requirements for annual resident assessment. It includes an osteopathic component that fullls the ACGME’s OPP/OMT formative assessment requirement for programs with Osteopathic Recognition. The exam is open to DO and MD residents in ACGME­accredited programs with or without Osteopathic Recognition. Sitting for two In-Service examinations in the rst and/or second years of residency training fullls a requirement for the resident to qualify for participation in the Early Entry Initial Certication (EEIC) pathway.
Early Entry Initial Certication (EEIC) Pathway [10]
The EEIC gives the resident an opportunity to take a con­densed certication examination in January of their third year of residency instead of taking the traditional board examina­tion in April of their nal year of residency. The January EEIC examination consists of 175 multiple-choice questions compared to 275 multiple-choice questions in the traditional examination. While the rst two ISE exams are formative, the EEIC examination is summative. This pathway was created as an incentive for residents to take the AOBFP examination.
Board certication is conferred when the AOA and AOBFP receive the “Residency Complete” attestation from the residency program and the resident receives a passing mark on the EEIC examination.
One distinct advantage of the EEIC pathway is that in the event of a failure, the resident has the opportunity to take the traditional examination in April before the end of the residency.
Table 3.1 explains the board certication examination schedule.
Table 3.1 Approximate times of scheduled board certication exami­nations [11]
Examination type Approximate times of examinations EEIC Examination Winter, usually January via the remote
proctored platform. Candidates will take the exam from the convenience of their home or
ofce with the security of a remote proctor. OMT Performance Examination
Initial Certication Examinations
Given in conjunction with the ACOFP Annual
Convention and Scientic Seminar in March or
April.
The exam is offered once in the spring and once
in the fall via the remote proctored platform.
Candidates will take the exam from the
convenience of their home or ofce with the
security of a remote proctor.
ACOFP Education andResearch Foundation Initial Certication Fund [12]
The fund was established to help cover the cost of the cogni­tive examination and practical examination fees and travel costs for initial certication. The ACOFP Education and Research Foundation established this grant program to cover costs incurred during the resident’s initial certication. To be eligible, the resident must be a member of the ACOFP, and sit for the AOBFP written (cognitive) exam and the OMT performance (practical) exam. Applicants for either the EEIC pathway or the traditional initial certication pathway are encouraged to apply. To qualify for the grant, candidates must not be eligible to receive support from their residency program sufcient to cover the cost of the AOBFP examina­tion plus travel. Proof of board fee and travel cost payment and a completed travel expense report and necessary tax information are required.
Maintenance ofOsteopathic Family Medicine Certication andOsteopathic Continuous Certication (OCC) [13]
The four components to maintaining Osteopathic Family Medicine certication for practicing physicians are explained in Table3.2.
Table 3.2 Components of osteopathic continuous certication
Component number Description of component Component 1 (Active
Licensure)
Component 2 (Lifelong Learning)
Component 3 (Cognitive Assessment)
Component 4 (Practice Performance Assessment)
A candidate/diplomat must hold a valid, active license to practice medicine in a US state, commonwealth, District of Columbia or USTerritory or Canada. Those physicians holding an active license (or registration) to practice medicine outside the United States may be considered for OCC on a case-by-case basis. Physicians are required to earn 120hours of CME every 3years. 30 credits must be AOA Category 1A, an additional 30 credits can be either AOA Category 1A or 1B, and the remaining 60 required credits are exible (1A, 1B, 2A, 2B). Diplomate status requires participation in the AOBFP Longitudinal Assessment program. Complete one practice performance activity every 3years.