Accredited Group Learning Activities
Conferences, rounds, journal clubs or small-group activities that adhere to Royal College standards. Accredited group learning activities can occur face-to-face or online.

Examples:
• Accredited rounds, journal clubs, small-groups – 1 credit per hour
• Accredited conferences – 1 credit per hour

Unaccredited Group Learning Activities
Unaccredited rounds, journal clubs, small-group activities or conferences that have not been submitted for accreditation and have no industry sponsorship.

Examples:
• Unaccredited rounds, journal clubs, s

Planned Learning
Learning activities initiated by a physician (independently or in collaboration with peers or mentors) to address a need, problem, issue or goal relevant to their professional practice.

Examples:
• Fellowships – 100 credits per year
• Formal courses – 25 credits per course
• Personal learning projects – 2 credits per hour
• Trainee-ships – 2 credits per hour

Scanning
Learning activities used by a physician to enhance their awareness of new evidence, perspectives or discoveries that are potentially relevant to their professional practice.

Examples:
• Reading a book – 10 credits per book
• Reading a book chapter or journal volume – 2 credits per chapter/volume
• Reading a journal article or bulk journal reading with transcript – 1 credit per article
• Bulk online reading/scanning with transcript – 1 credit per hour
• Podcasts, audio, video, internet searching (Medscape, UpToDate, DynaMed) – 0.5 credits per activity
• POEMs – 0.25 credits per activity

Systems Learning
Learning stimulated by participation in activities such as setting practice standards, patient safety, continuous
quality improvement; curriculum development; assessment tools and strategy development; examination board membership; or peer review.

Examples:
• Clinical practice guideline development – 20 credits per year
• Quality care/patient safety committee – 15 credits per year
• Curriculum development – 15 credits per year
• Examination development – 15 credits per year
• Peer review – 15 credits per year

(CPD Tips for Section 3 – Dr. Gigi Osler, Past CPD Committee Chair, Spring 2018)

If my experience is like many of yours, obtaining Maintenance of Certification (MOC) credits in Section 3: Assessment, is very challenging. The emphasis on assessment underlines its importance to provide data and feedback in order to identify our knowledge or performance needs and to develop future learning opportunities. Meaningful and constructive feedback is essential in assessment and for improving our skills.

Here is an easy, no-cost way to earn Section 3: Assessment credits (and even Section 2: Self-learning credits if you are really motivated!). Performance assessment activities can occur in a simulated or actual practice environment. It requires a colleague but both of you will be able to claim MOC credits:

• Ask a trusted colleague to assess your performance, either your technical or non-technical skills, during a simulated or actual surgical procedure. You can have them either assist you during the procedure or simply observe your performance.

• Immediately after the procedure, consider what worked well for you, what you would like to continue doing, and what you would like to improve on during future surgeries.

• Then review and discuss how you think you performed with your colleague. Review and discuss their feedback on your performance.

• Re-evaluate your self-assessment and compare to their feedback. Did you both agree that certain elements of your performance could be improved? If so, this is the perfect time to decide on a plan of action for further improvement, such as pursuing a Personal Learning Project (PLP), which earns your further credits in Section 2: Self-learning.  PLP Template

• To assist you in this assessment activity, the CPD Committee has developed these downloadable and fillable forms that can be used to assess both your technical and non-technical skills. Direct Observation Forms

• If you were assessed, you can claim “Section 3: Direct Observation” which earns you 3 credits/hour of time spent reflecting on your performance, receiving feedback and revising your self-assessment.

• As the “assessor”, your colleague can claim 15 “Section 2: Peer Review” credits for the year (regardless of how many times during the year they assess you or other colleagues).

I look forward to seeing you in Quebec City on June 16-19, 2018 for our 72nd Annual Meeting!

________________________________________________________________

Knowledge Assessment
Programs approved by Royal College accredited CPD provider organizations that provide data with feedback to individual physicians regarding their current knowledge base, enabling the identification of needs and development of future learning opportunities relevant to their practice.

Examples:
Accredited self-assessment programs – 3 credits per hour

Performance Assessment
Activities that provide data with feedback to individual physicians, groups or inter-professional health teams related to their personal or collective performance across a broad range of professional practice domains. Performance assessment activities can occur in a simulated or actual practice environment.

Examples:*
• Accredited simulation activities
• Chart audit and feedback
• Multi-source feedback
• Direct observation
• Feedback on teaching
• Annual performance review
• Practice assessments

* All assessment activities are 3 credits per hour

The National Standard for Support of Accredited CPD Activities (the National Standard) describes the process and requirements for gathering, managing, and disclosing conflicts of interest to participants. The National Standard is applicable to all accredited CPD activities included within the Canadian national/provincial CME/CPD accreditation systems for physicians. 

Definitions: 

Conflict of interest: A conflict of interest is a set of conditions in which judgement or decisions concerning a primary interest (example a patients’ welfare, the validity of research and/or quality of medical education) is unduly influenced by a secondary interest (personal or organizational benefit including financial gain, academic or career advancement, or other benefits to family, friends, or colleagues). 

Perceived conflict of interest: A perceived conflict of interest is the appearance of a conflict of interest as judged by outside observers regardless of whether an actual conflict of interest exists 

Real conflict of interest: A real conflict of interest is when two or more interests are indisputably in conflict. 

National Standard Element 3: Conflict of Interest 

This element describes the processes and requirements for gathering, managing and disclosing conflicts of interest to participants.  

3.1 All members of the SPC, speakers, moderators, facilitators and authors must provide to the CPD provider organization a written description of all relationships with for-profit and not-for-profit organizations over the previous 2 years including (but not necessarily limited to): 

1. Any direct financial payments including receipt of honoraria; 

1. Membership on advisory boards or speakers’ bureaus; 

1. Funded grants or clinical trials; 

1. Patents  on a drug, product or device; and 

1. All other investments or relationships that could be seen by a reasonable, well-informed participant as having the potential to influence the content of the educational activity. 

3.2 The SPC is responsible to review all disclosed financial relationships of speakers, moderators, facilitators and authors in advance of the CPD activity to determine whether action is required to manage potential or real conflicts of interest. The SPC must also have procedures in place to be followed if a conflict of interest comes to its attention prior to or during the CPD activity. 

3.3 All members of the SPC, speakers, moderators, facilitators, and authors, must disclose to participants their relationships as described in 3.1 

3.4 Any individual who fails to disclose their relationships as described in 3.1 and 3.3 cannot participate as a member of the SPC, speaker, moderator, facilitator or author of an accredited CPD activity. 

The National Standard for Support of Accredited CPD Activities (the National Standard) describes the process and requirements for gathering, managing, and disclosing conflicts of interest to participants. The National Standard is applicable to all accredited CPD activities included within the Canadian national/provincial CME/CPD accreditation systems for physicians. 

Definitions: 

Conflict of interest: A conflict of interest is a set of conditions in which judgement or decisions concerning a primary interest (example a patients’ welfare, the validity of research and/or quality of medical education) is unduly influenced by a secondary interest (personal or organizational benefit including financial gain, academic or career advancement, or other benefits to family, friends, or colleagues). 

Perceived conflict of interest: A perceived conflict of interest is the appearance of a conflict of interest as judged by outside observers regardless of whether an actual conflict of interest exists 

Real conflict of interest: A real conflict of interest is when two or more interests are indisputably in conflict. 

National Standard Element 3: Conflict of Interest 

This element describes the processes and requirements for gathering, managing and disclosing conflicts of interest to participants.  

3.1 All members of the SPC, speakers, moderators, facilitators and authors must provide to the CPD provider organization a written description of all relationships with for-profit and not-for-profit organizations over the previous 2 years including (but not necessarily limited to): 

1. Any direct financial payments including receipt of honoraria; 

1. Membership on advisory boards or speakers’ bureaus; 

1. Funded grants or clinical trials; 

1. Patents  on a drug, product or device; and 

1. All other investments or relationships that could be seen by a reasonable, well-informed participant as having the potential to influence the content of the educational activity. 

3.2 The SPC is responsible to review all disclosed financial relationships of speakers, moderators, facilitators and authors in advance of the CPD activity to determine whether action is required to manage potential or real conflicts of interest. The SPC must also have procedures in place to be followed if a conflict of interest comes to its attention prior to or during the CPD activity. 

3.3 All members of the SPC, speakers, moderators, facilitators, and authors, must disclose to participants their relationships as described in 3.1 

3.4 Any individual who fails to disclose their relationships as described in 3.1 and 3.3 cannot participate as a member of the SPC, speaker, moderator, facilitator or author of an accredited CPD activity. 

 This requirement relates to the organizations compliance with the conditions set out by the Canadian Copyright Act.  

In order to be compliant with Standard 1.4 Professional and Legal Standards, the Society will implemented policies and procedures to ensure its governance, operations, planning processes and records management comply with applicable professional and legal standards including the protection of privacy, confidentiality and copyright.  (Canadian Accreditation Standards for CPD Provider Organizations)   

A Guide to Copyright’ provides a good introduction to the basics of copyright law in Canada –  

https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/cipointernet-internetopic.nsf/eng/h_wr02281.html#understandingCopyright 

Definition:  “The sole right to produce or reproduce a work or a substantial part of it in any form. It includes the right to perform the work or any substantial part of it or, in the case of a lecture, to deliver it. If the work is unpublished, copyright includes the right to publish the work or any substantial part of it.”   (A Guide to Copyright, Canada Intellectual Property Office) 

Copyright is often confused with patents, trademarks, industrial designs, etc. 

• Like copyright – these are rights granted to intellectual creativity and are forms of IP, however there are subtle but important differences re: the product  

• For example, trademarks may be a combination of words, sounds or designs used to distinguish a good or service (from others)  

For General Information 

• Works applies to every original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic work where the author was at the date of making the work a citizen or subject, or a person ordinarily resident in, Canada or some other treaty country  
• Also applies when a work is first published in a treaty country even if the author was not a citizen or subject etc.  

The Copyright Act does not define “substantial part”.  

• No quantitative guideline: what constitutes a substantial part, is focused instead on the quality of what was taken from the original work rather than the quantity that was taken.  

• Generally, a few sentences from a periodical article or book as a quotation is not a reproduction of a substantial part of the work.  

Copyright Act includes several Exceptions:   

1. Fair dealing exception  

2)   Education exception 

• “permits use of a copyright-protected work without permission from the copyright owner or the payment of copyright royalties” (must pass 2 tests)  

(1) If the copyright-protected work is used for educational purposes, this passes the first test. Other acceptable purposes are research, private study, criticism, review, news reporting, and satire or parody.  

(2) Dealing must be “fair.” In landmark decisions, in 2004 and 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada provided guidance as to what this test means – guidance forming the underpinnings to these guidelines.   

When ‘Fair dealing’ is not required:  

• “Fair dealing is not needed where no substantial part of a work is being used, the work has entered the public domain or is available with open access (OA), or a valid licence allows the use in question. In these cases, the work may generally be used without further permissions or clearances” 

Copyright Compliance Checklist 

CPD Activity Name: ____________________________________ 
Date: _______________ 
Presenter(s): ________________________________________ 
Reviewer: ___________________________________________ 

1. Copyright Protection

• Is the material protected by copyright? 

• If yes, confirm copyright term (life of author + 50 years; 70 years for sound recordings). 

• If material is public domain, no further permission needed. 

2. Substantiality of Use

• Is the portion of the work used substantial? 

• Portion used is less than 2.5% of total work or 1–2 pages (generally insubstantial). 

• For larger portions (full chapters, articles), further review required. 

3. License Verification

• Does a license cover the intended use (e.g., institutional license, Creative Commons)? 

• If licensed, does the license permit this specific use? 

• If no license, move to statutory exceptions or permission clearance. 

4. Statutory Exceptions

• Does the use fall under a statutory exception? 

• Fair Dealing Exception (education, research, private study, criticism, review, etc.) 

• Educational Institution Exception 

• Personal Use Exception 

5. Permission and Clearance

• If no license or exception applies, has written permission been obtained? 

• Permission documentation is attached or filed. 

• Alternative materials or links provided if permission is delayed or denied. 

AGM- Scientific Program

Check out Scientific Program information for upcoming and past AGMs.

Upcoming Events

Check out the upcoming events calendar.

The Journal

The Journal of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery is the official publication of the Society. For more information click here.

The Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery is dedicated to improving patient care through the support of education, the promotion of research, the dissemination of information, the scientific advancement of the Society, and the maintenance of high professional and ethical standards.

More about the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery (CSO-HNS).

• RCPSC Framework of CPD Activities
• National Standard for Support of Accredited CPD Activities
• CMA Guidelines for Interaction with Industry
• Policies and Procedures for Co-development of CPD Events with Physician and Non-physician Organizations
• Guest Faculty Reimbursement
• Download PLP Template / Projet de formation personnel (PFP)

MOC – Section 2

Do you:

• Want an easy way to earn more Maintenance of Certification (MOC) credits?
• Want to triple your MOC credits when you attend an accredited meeting?
• Want to earn MOC credits when you attend non-accredited meetings?

Develop a Personal Learning Project (PLP). A PLP is a learning activity that you create to address a question, need, or goal relevant to your professional practice. PLPs are a great way to maximize your learning and earn you 2 credits / hour in Section 2. If you develop a PLP at an accredited meeting then these Section 2 credits are in addition to the meeting’s Section 1 credits.

We have developed an easy way for you to create a PLP and earn Section 2 credits. PLPs can be used at both accredited and non-accredited group learning activities (for example at a pharmaceutical dinner or satellite symposium). You can also create PLPs to answer any learning question, at any time, not just at meetings.

Here is a 6-step process for developing your PLP for use at a meeting:

1. Download the PLP template –

Download PLP Template
Projet de formation personnel (PFP);

2. What do you want to learn? Identify your question.

3. Develop a learning plan. Review the learning objectives for the meeting and any reading material.

4. At the meeting, learn with intent and keep your question in mind. Discuss your question informally with your colleagues.

5. After the meeting, reflect on your question:
a. What did you learn?
b. What additional learning will you do?
c. Will you make a change in your practice?

6. Use the template to document your PLP in MAINPORT.

Your CPD Committee will continue to find ways for you to maximize your learning and MOC credits. Please email me fosler@sbgh.mb.ca with any questions, ideas, suggestions or comments. Have a great summer!

MOC – Section 2 and/or Section 3

Do you:

• Write papers for publication?
• Review manuscripts for journals?

If so, you can earn Section 2 and/or Section 3 Maintenance of Certification (MOC) credits for your time.

As an author, the time that you spend reviewing the feedback from your peers on each submitted article counts in Section 3 (Assessment) under Practice Assessment for 3 credits/hour. No documentation is required to record this activity.

As a journal reviewer, the time that you spend reviewing articles by your peers counts in Section 2 (Self-learning) under Peer Review for 15 credits per year (note this is not 15 credits per article, just 15 credits per year total). No documentation is required to record this activity. 

Download a PDF on

 “Quick Tips for Writing Goals and Objectives (U of T)”

 “How to Write Learning Objectives”

 “Writing Learning Objectives”