Did the students' satisfaction rates at Avalon University School of Medicine correlate with the occurrence of accreditation site visits?

Abstract

Introduction: Accreditation of medical education programs can be observed from different perspectives. Regulatory/accreditation agencies consider it vital to assure a certain level of quality. Other stakeholders may perceive the accreditation process as a negative experience, draining resources, and efforts. Although accreditation may improve the program's governance and administration, its direct or indirect impact on students must be further investigated. This study explores the relationship between the occurrence of accreditation site visits and student satisfaction rates at Avalon University School of Medicine.

Methods: A comparison study was conducted with retrospective satisfaction data from two accreditation cycles at AUSOM. We used the Caribbean Accreditation Authority for Education in Medicine and Other Health Professions (CAAM-HP) student surveys for data collection, and data from 2017, 2019, and 2022 were used. The response rate was 70% (n = 71), 72% (n = 47), and 60% (n = 56) for basic science students and 80% (n = 111), 82% (n = 115), and 70% (n = 76) for clinical students in 2017, 2019, and 2022, respectively. The survey for basic sciences students included 37 questions/items, and the survey for clinical students included 39 questions/items. The responses for the questionnaire were on the five-point Likert scale. The retrospective data were evaluated using the unpaired Wilcoxon-rank sum test.

Results: The ratings for the basic science students' survey increased from 2017 to 2019 (first accreditation cycle) only for 11 items/questions and they were increased from 2019 to 2022 for all items/questions. The ratings for clinical science students' surveys increased from 2017 to 2019 (the first accreditation cycle) for all items/questions with a statistically significant p-value. They increased for 28 questions/items from 2019 to 2022, and two items (availability and adequacy of career counseling) showed statistically significant p-values.

Conclusions: The pre-accreditation preparation and the self-evaluation process while correcting the program's deficiencies are essential triggers for the quality improvement process associated with accreditation.