Nobody is perfect. That is something on which nearly everyone can agree. For Corrin Sullivan, assistant dean for curriculum at the Kirk Kerkorian School of Medicine at UNLV, it’s an expression that ensures the school will continue to uphold the highest standards in education, research, and clinical care.
As the lead member of the steering committee for the school’s continuous improvement (CI) program, Sullivan is helping the school “cultivate an environment that engages in continuous assessment and improvement processes,” as its mission states. Continuous improvement is defined as the deliberate and incremental improvement of processes, operations, and safety measures that is a response to educational, community, and patient needs.
“Continuous improvement for us,” says Sullivan, “is to make sure that not only do we maintain the requirements and standards and expectations of a medical school that's fully accredited within the United States, but also that we examine, we evaluate, and we're always on a mission to improve and make sure that we're doing interventions where needed to ensure that we have a quality-based program that's not only focused in competency, but also caring for the community and for the people who work for us.”
Expansion of the continuous improvement program began in February 2023. Using the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) accreditation standards as the framework for the program, the steering committee had their gold standard roadmap. The LCME is an accrediting body for medical education programs that lead to an MD degree.
“LCME has comprehensive standards,” says Sullivan. “That's why the accreditation process is so difficult because it really encompasses everything from facilities, finance, the education program, evaluation, to faculty.” She continues, “I'm not a ‘reinvent the wheel’ type of person. We've used the 12 LCME accreditation standards as our framework on how we approach continuous improvement …”
Several teams work on these standards and a task force oversees the process. Driven by the data gathered, they are constantly assessing successes and adjusting for greater improvement.
A major influence on the curriculum from a CI perspective is the sufficiency of education and training, according to Sullivan. “When it comes to the practice of any kind of field, especially medicine, it has to be hands-on. You learn and you apply and you do that in a very short amount of time to ensure mastery and expertise … From the first day students enter orientation, they’re immersed in the population health and emergency response course … which throws them into emergency skills training. They learn how to take vitals and apply care of injuries requiring immediate medical attention for patients of all ages. This includes basic life support/CPR training on the very first day of emergency skills instruction. Students also complete ride-alongs with first responders and paramedics. So, essentially from the first day, they are learning of the sanctity of life and how to save a life.”
Assisting Sullivan with everything CI is Angie Sioco, accreditation and continuous quality improvement (CQI) manager. “Angie is vital to the continuous improvement process. Her role develops and manages the implementation and administration of the school of medicine’s accreditation, evaluation, and program review processes that not only support the school's core mission and education program goals, but monitors and tracks improvement processes for accreditation and CQI compliance efforts across the school,” says Sullivan.
For the school of medicine, the approach to CI is a little different than other universities.
“Usually, most universities have a whole department that's devoted to continuous quality improvement,” Sullivan says. “Ours is a little different in that it is all-hands-on-deck and everyone's a stakeholder in the CI process, which is great in terms of culture building and promoting excellence. Everybody knows that the standard is excellence and they take ownership of the role they have, whether it's a program or running the library, whatever their scope of work is, and make sure that it meets a standard of excellence.”
The all-hands-on-deck approach appears to be working, as the CI program has noted several successes in its short lifespan. Chief among them, adjusting and providing multi-sources of feedback for students so they know how they’re doing as they progress through a course or rotation. Without frequent and unsolicited midterm feedback, evaluations only provide a single form of feedback for student improvement.
“Students wanted more feedback,” says Sullivan. “So, immediately, we started putting measures and processes in place with our MedHub evaluation system to make sure that all students, received midterm and multi-sources of formative feedback from their doctor mentor, from the course directors, the clerkship directors, on how they're performing and areas to improve … and the numbers jumped up to a 94 percent satisfaction rate and a 100 percent acknowledgement that students receive formative feedback, which is very, very good. So that was the first and most impactful improvement when it came to implementing our new methodology for continuous improvement processes at the education level.”
Other areas of success include policies, security processes, faculty feedback, and facilities issues. The best part about the CI program? Anyone can participate.
“We have red drop boxes that are located throughout our building and a link on our website,” says Sullivan. “You can submit an anonymous or confidential request if you have any ideas and we get all kinds of great stuff.” Including a request to have more piano music in the building. “And so, sure enough, there is a piano in the building, and we have a student who's actually a really accomplished pianist. And I was like, ‘We can knock this out. Check that box!’ It was incredible in that it reinforced that we take every suggestion under consideration, review the underlying issues or concerns, and take reasonable action.”
Small and large successes aside, the primary focus for the CI program is to make sure there is a robust system in place for improvement processes and for accreditation. “We have to have everything in place for a successful accreditation visit and our reaccreditation is scheduled for October 27 to 29 of 2025.”
Despite the anxiety that grows each day as that time draws nearer, Sullivan is optimistic and clear-headed about the true priorities. “We are not only going to build great doctors, we're going to build a great healthcare district.”
