Oculofacial plastic surgery fellowship director perspectives on accreditation council for graduate medical education (ACGME) accreditation - Summary - MDSpire
Advertisement
Oculofacial plastic surgery fellowship director perspectives on accreditation council for graduate medical education (ACGME) accreditation
To evaluate fellowship directors’ perspectives on the potential transition to ACGME accreditation for oculofacial plastic surgery fellowships and identify perceived benefits and barriers.
Approach:
Survey Methodology: A cross-sectional, national survey was conducted in October 2025 among all ASOPRS fellowship directors using a three-question electronic survey.
Key Findings:
Only 20.5% of directors supported transitioning to ACGME accreditation.
79.5% opposed the transition, citing concerns such as regulatory burden (n=33, 94.3%), duty-hour restrictions (n=29, 82.9%), decreased training (n=23, 65.7%), cost (n=25, 71.4%), limitations on fellows’ billing ability (n=24, 68.6%), and lack of institutional support (n=21, 60.0%).
Supporters viewed ACGME oversight as a 'gold standard' and a pathway to board certification.
Interpretation:
The majority of fellowship directors oppose ACGME accreditation due to concerns over regulation and financial implications, while a minority see it as beneficial for legitimacy and certification.
Limitations:
The survey had a response rate of 83.0%, which may not fully represent all fellowship directors' views and could introduce bias.
The survey was limited to predefined options and may not capture all concerns or perspectives.
Conclusion:
The findings highlight significant opposition among fellowship directors regarding the transition to ACGME accreditation, primarily due to concerns about regulatory and financial impacts.
