When it comes to the approval or designation of individuals and organizations the terms accreditation, certification, and certificate are all commonly used and misused. Understanding the differences leads to a better understanding of professional credentialing. 

Accreditation 

Accreditation generally applies to an organization (as opposed to a person).  Accreditation can be awarded to a college, a factory, a laboratory, or in this case – a certification program. The Institute of Credentialing Excellence (ICE) defines accreditation as it relates to certification programs as a “voluntary process by which a nongovernmental agency grants a time-limited recognition to an institution, organization, business, or other entity after verifying that it has met predetermined and standardized criteria.”

Accreditation is relevant to specialty pharmacists in many ways: accreditation of pharmacy degree programs, accreditation of continuing education activities for re-licensure, accreditation of pharmacies and accreditation of the entities (Certification Boards) that certify pharmacists. URAC accredits both health care organizations and specified functional areas within the health care organizations. The Joint Commission (JCAHO) accredits a range of health care organizations including hospitals, doctor’s offices, and nursing homes. Often, accreditation of a facility (such as a pharmacy or hospital) requires personnel certification as one aspect of accreditation compliance. For example the American Nurses Credentialing Center Magnet Recognition Program includes the percent of certified nurses its evaluation process. 

Accreditation of Pharmacy Degree Programs 

The Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) is, according to the ACPE web site, the “national agency for the accreditation of professional degree programs in pharmacy and providers of continuing pharmacy education.” ACPE, like many other organizations that accredit educational institutions or programs, is recognized by the US Department of Education (USDE). 

Accredited Pharmacist Certification Programs 

Accreditation for certification programs is offered by two organizations: the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the National Commission for Certifying Agencies (NCCA). Both ANSI and the NCCA have established standards for professional certification programs. Certification programs that apply and document compliance with either the NCCA or ANSI standards are considered to be “accredited certification programs.” This accreditation demonstrates that the certification program is developed and maintained in keeping with best practices. Achieving accreditation is considered the “gold standard” for certification programs.

In the pharmacy industry several certification programs are NCCA accredited, including the Board of Pharmacy Specialties, Commission for Certification in Geriatric Pharmacy, and the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board. The newly formed Specialty Pharmacy Certification Board is developing its Certified Specialty Pharmacist (CSP) program to meet the NCCA accreditation standards. 

Certification 

The NCCA Standards define certification as an often voluntary process by which individuals who have demonstrated the level of knowledge and skill required in the profession, occupation, role, or skill are identified to the public and other stakeholders. All professional certification programs share the following common elements:

• Certification is time-limited, meaning that the certified individuals must periodically renew or recertify.
• Certification measures individuals to a pre-determined standard using an assessment, which is most often a standardized exam.
• Certification is usually voluntary
• Certification is independent of any one class, course, or training program

Certification programs can be identified by these common elements. If it has a rigorous and standardized exam, an expiration date with required recertification, and eligibility requirements that are not tied to any one training or education program – then it’s probably a professional certification program. Individuals who successfully become certified are granted use of the associated acronym. 

Certificate Programs 

There are many types of certificate programs, but the type most often confused with certification is an assessment-based certificate program – a certificate course that includes a test. By definition, assessment-based certificate programs require completion of a training program or coursework followed by a test or some other demonstration that they met the course objectives.  Certificate programs are often used for continuing education.

The table below illustrates these three credentialing methods: 

References

Institute for Credentialing Excellence (2005). The ICE Guide to Understanding Credentialing Concepts. Washington, DC.

Institute for Credentialing Excellence (2006). NOCA’s Basic Guide to Credentialing Terminology. Washington, DC.

http://www.pharmacycredentialing.org/ccp/

TAMPA, Fla.

“SPEC will transform specialty pharmacy education and training for professionals working in this growing area of the pharmacy industry and allow professionals to expand their knowledge and skills to improve patient outcomes,” Emile J Guillot, BS, Executive Vice President of SPEC, said. “An educated workforce helps to protect the public by improving health outcomes and reducing medication errors.”

SPEC provides educational programming for all healthcare professionals and provides enhanced career development opportunities, including preparation for certification as a Certified Specialty Pharmacist ™ (CSP™, http://www.spcboard.org/).  The goal of the content, developed by leaders in specialty pharmacy and the various therapeutic categories, is to create an awareness of the quality of life issues for the specialty patient and the care management programs to address them.

“Given the fact that 50 percent of the drug spend into the foreseeable future is specialty pharmaceuticals, education is needed for the various stakeholders working together in a collaborative environment in the pursuit of improved outcomes and quality measures,” Burt Zweigenhaft, CEO, Onco360™ and NASP Board Member, said.

“The programs that went live today are only the tip of the iceberg,” Guillot stated. SPEC is currently developing more than 250 hours of specialty pharmacy education with more than 75 faculty experts from pharmacy schools and specialty pharmacies. Each therapeutic area offers a certificate program, and will also qualify for educational requirements for taking the CSP exam, which will be offered in October of this year.

“The content launched today provides participants with a deeper knowledge into rare diseases, drug therapies and specific specialty drug nuances,” Gary M. Cohen, BSPharm, RPh, NASP CEO, said. “One of the most important benefits of NASP membership is complimentary access to this unmatched educational resource.”

NASP, founded in 2012, represents specialty pharmacy professionals in all practice settings and highlights the unique value its members bring to patients and the healthcare system.  Specialty pharmacy is the fastest growing segment in the industry today and NASP provides valuable benefits to members by creating a strong, unified voice for all stakeholders.

Source: National Association of Specialty Pharmacy (www.nasprx.org)

Media Contact: Gary Cohen, This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

According to a new study conducted by Avalere Health LLC commissioned by Janssen Biotech, Inc, and Johnson & Johnson Health Care systems, ensuring appropriate use of specialty drugs is a major priority for health plans and will become increasingly important over the next three to five years for future growth. Express Scripts’ report estimated that spending on specialty drugs is expected to grow at 20 percent due to the growth of specialty drugs in medical innovation. This represents a major cost driver for health plans and employers.

This new study is the first in a series of DIMENSIONS of Specialty Pharmaceuticals: Evolving Trends in Market Access. In this study they found that there was a significant variance between national, regional, and integrated systems (IDS) health plans’ view of emerging opportunity areas in this field. The study consisted of 90 respondents engaging in more than 800 activities to manage appropriate use and costs associated with specialty drug utilization.

The study focused on two specific questions: How is access to specialty pharmaceuticals evolving? What kind of initiatives and activities are organizations pursuing to ensure appropriate access to and utilization of these products?

Among the respondents, the researchers found that national plans perceive opportunity areas to be more mature than other plans. Almost all national plans report progress in the integration of delivery system changes; site of care optimization; medication adherence; innovative contracting arrangements; and design benefit and utilization management into specialty pharmaceutical management practices.

When asked why regional and IDS plans are moving slower at pursuing these activities, Leigh-Ann Bruhn, Director at Avalere Health told SpecialtyPharmaJournal, “For the limited instances in which health plans are not involved in emerging opportunity areas, they most commonly cite barriers related to internal variables and value demonstration. For regional plans, lack of organizational interest and the existence of more promising investments are the most frequently cited hurdles, followed by lack of integration within a plan and insufficient IT infrastructure. Similarly for IDSs, high cost, lack of organizational support, and insufficient IT infrastructure are the top reasons for abstaining from an opportunity area. Barriers must also be considered within the context of state insurance requirements and existing contract obligations.”

According to the study, IT infrastructure is a high priority for national plans and IDSs, however nearly a third of regional plans report active investment in IT.

“IT is a growing sector in our industry, especially with the rapid rate at which mobile technology continues to evolve and improve the way we all conduct business,” John Unger, Group Product Director, Payer Marketing at Janssen Biotech Inc. said. “In the DIMENSIONS survey report, the output of a first-of-its kind study that Janssen Biotech and Johnson & Johnson Health Care Systems commissioned through Avalere Health, LLC, we learned that 95% of national plans and 93% of Independent Delivery Systems are prioritizing IT infrastructure versus only 30% of regional plans.”

The study also found that payers are seeing delivery system changes as an area of investment. Approximately 45 percent of national plans report them as established, whereas regional and IDS plans report them as emerging at a rate of 93 percent and 94 percent respectively.

“The research shows that payers are investing in a variety of delivery system changes, including acquisition of provider systems, payer/provider contacts for Centers of Excellence (COE) or preferred treatment site for specialty services, ACO partnerships (with and without risk), and shared savings programs,” Bruhn stated. “Interestingly, contracts for COE were the most often highly rated activity across all 45 activities explored in this research.”

All three health plan types rated provider acceptance as the number one critical success factor for new initiatives. “This is a key finding from the DIMENSIONS research. Now that this is clearly in focus, how to obtain better rates of provider acceptance is a natural follow-on question that is ripe to explore in the future,” said Bruhn.

Source: Dimensions of Specialty Pharmaceuticals: Evolving Trends in Market Access

Last Updated: 5/15/13; 11:30AM EST