The Single Accreditation System: Risks to the Osteopathic Profession

Abstract

In August 2014, the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) and the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM) signed a memorandum of understanding with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) to create the Single Accreditation System (SAS) for graduate medical education (GME) in the United States. The AOA made the decision that it would close its GME accreditation system in response to dramatic growth in colleges of osteopathic medicine, a shortfall in osteopathic GME positions with increasing dependence on the ACGME system, ACGME policy decisions that adversely impacted osteopathic students, and declining osteopathic student interest in primary care. Osteopathic teaching institutions bore responsibility for meeting ACGME accreditation standards between 2015 and 2020, including determining institutional sponsorship, which program applications to submit, program size, educational leadership, and whether to pursue Osteopathic Recognition. Approximately 692 of 954 (72.5%) eligible osteopathic GME programs in 2014-2015 obtained ACGME accreditation by June 1, 2020. There were sharp reductions in surgical and subspecialty programs and a significant drop of DOs in educational leadership positions. A low percentage of ACGME-accredited programs applied for Osteopathic Recognition. In closing its GME accreditation system and joining the ACGME, the AOA gave up control of its direct relationship with osteopathic residents, fellows, and teaching institutions to gain critical GME opportunities. In this article, the author considers whether this gain will offset the risks taken by the AOA, including decreased DO leadership opportunities and role models, lower than expected interest in Osteopathic Recognition, and possible decreased DO interest in osteopathic organizations and osteopathic specialty board certification. Time and the choices of current and future DO trainees in ACGME programs will determine the future of the osteopathic profession-and whether these risks were worth taking.