The future of medical technology education

The future of medical technology education

15. Murray, H. W. et al. 1978. Serious in fections caused by Streptococcus milleri. Am. J. Med. 64:759-764. 16. Parker, M. T., and L. C. Ball. 1976. S...

208KB Sizes 2 Downloads 88 Views

15. Murray, H. W. et al. 1978. Serious in fections caused by Streptococcus milleri. Am. J. Med. 64:759-764. 16. Parker, M. T., and L. C. Ball. 1976. Streptococci and aerococci associated with systemic infection in man. J. Med. Microbiol. 9:275-302. 17. Poole, P. M, and G. Wilson. 1976. In-

Prc>,mnptivc tdentlilcation ot Streptococcus milleri" in 5 h. J. Clin, Microbiol 24:495--497

fection with minute-colony-forming B hemolytic streptococci. J. Clin. Pathol. 29:740-745. 18. Ruoff, K. L. 1988. Streptococcus anginosus ("Streptococcus milleri"): the unrecognized pathogen. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 1: 102-108. 19. Ruoff, K. L., and M. J. Fcrraro. 1986.

20. Shlae,,, l). M. ct al. 1981. lnlections due to Lancefield group F and related streptococci IS. milleri, S. anginosus). Medicine (Baltimore) 60:197-207.

Although program approval is a relatively new process, program accreditation has been in existence for several years. The data supplied in Table 1 indicate that the number of accredited programs was at a peak in 1982, with 639 programs reported. Since that time, however, there has been a continual decline in all program categories, except M L T - A D programs. The NAACLS Program Services Section has been tracking reasons for program closings since 1982. Letters from program officials giving reasons for closure have been received since that time. Programs which indicated they chose to discontinue also indicated the reasons for closure. The reasons for program closure were tabulated and are presented in Table 2. A review of the reasons cited during the past 6 years indicates that

institutional budget restriction is the predominant factor. However, after speaking with program officials across the country, many cited the key factors influencing enrollment as 1) the decline in the number of 18- to 22-year-old students and 2) the competition of other occupations which attract students away from laboratory-related professions. One of these reasons was not an option cited in the program closure letters, and the other was indicated as the third ranked cause. Factors such as these indicate that program directors need to pursue several avenues to expand their student pool. First, programs should become more aggressive in recruiting students by using a variety of recruitment materials. Second, programs should become more nontraditional in their curricula by offering shortened training

Editorial The Future of Medical Technology Education Jacqueline N. Parochka, Ed.D. Executive Director National Accrediting Agency for Clinical Laboratory. Sciences Chicago, Illinois 60606

This article reflects" the views of the author and should not be interpreted as reflecting the opinion of the NAACLS Review Board. The National Accrediting Agency for Clinical Laboratory Sciences (NAACLS) is an autonomous, nonprofit organization established in 1973 as the successor to the American Society of Clinical Pathologists (ASCP) Board of Schools. It is jointly sponsored by the ASCP and the American Society for Medical Technology (ASMT). The American Society for Microbiology (ASM) and the National Society for Histotechnology (NSH) are participating organizations. The NAACLS serves as a review body in the accreditation process for Medical Technology (MT), Medical Laboratory Technician-Associate Degree (MLT-AD), Medical Laboratory Certificate (MLT-C), and Histotechnology (HT and HTL) programs accredited by the American Medical Association (AMA) Committee on Allied Health Education and Accreditation (CAHEA). The N A A C L S also conducts the approval of educational programs in clinical microbiology and phlebotomy. In 1987, N A A C L S approved the first microbiology program at the University of California at Los Angeles. In addition, nine programs in phlebotomy have been approved across the country.

68

0196-4399/88/$0.00

+ 02.20

Table 1 Summary of 1982-1986 Program Information Medical Technology

MLTAssociate Degree

MLTCertificate

Histotechnology

1982

Number of Programs Enrollment Graduates

639 8783 5996

187 5039 1746

73 1778 1079

50 199 139

1983

Number of Programs Enrollment Graduates

638 8296 5318

206 5504 1860

66 1743 1305

49 250 141

1984

Number of Programs Enrollment Graduates

615 8883 5370

221 6934 2437

57 1683 1517

47 263 146

1985

Number of Programs Enrollment Graduates

584 8150 4862

225 6115 2275

56 1340 1003

43 196 132

1986

Number of Programs Enrollment Graduates

516 6691 4477

214 5662 1930

47 1409 817

41 218 216

© 1988 Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc. ,,,,,

Clinical Microbiology Newsletter 10:9, 1988

Table 2 Reasons for Medical Technology Program Closures: 1982-1987 Totals

A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I.

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

Total

1 3 2 3 3 0 0 0 0

0 1 0 10 1 0 0 0 0

1 2 0 14 3 0 6 0 0

0 6 0 20 16 0 16 21 0

0 12 0 14 12 2 12 12 0

0 3 1 16 5 0 2 11 15

2 27 3 77 40 2 36 44 15

Reasons for closure Key A. pursuit of a higher level laboratoryeducation program. B. result of a change in sponsorshipwith another institution. C. federal governmentbudget restriction. D. institutional budget restriction. E. decliningenrollment. F. an insufficient number of clinical affiliates available. G. the impact of the DRG (DiagnosticRelated Groups). H. decliningjob market for graduates. I. No reasons given. periods and accepting portfolios that demonstrate life experiences which can substitute for standard course or credit sequences. Third, programs should start attracting mature adults who may be either looking for their first profession or contemplating a career change. Fourth, programs should initiate onthe-job retraining courses to attract retired clinical laboratory personnel back into the profession. Some program officials indicated that graduates were unable to secure positions in the clinical laboratory science field; thus, a decision to abandon the program was made. However, this issue is not substantiated nationally. A 1987 study done by Consortium for Clinical Laboratory Science Programs in Illinois (3) indicates that there are tremendous opportunities for placement of medical technologists. Approximately 92% of the graduates were employed in laboratory-related fields within 3 months of program completion. Also, by tracking the advertisements in the Sunday Chicago Tribune 5 weeks in sequence, beginning August 30, 1987, through September 27, 1987, the following respective numbers of separate advertisements for medical technologists were noted: 24, 15, 29, 28, and 20. No attempt was made to determine weekly duplication of previous advertisements. Student enrollment data from 1982 to

Clinical MicrobiologyNewsletter10:9, 1988

1986 indicate that the overall number of medical technology graduates in the country has declined over time (Table 1). Concurrently, the baby boom population continues to mature and will begin to reach age 60 by the year 2005 (U.S. Bureau of Statistics). This large group of consumers will cause change in the provision of health care and laboratory services. This factor was also listed in the previously cited Illinois study. If the decline in numbers of educated clinical laboratory personnel continues, the professional level of services offered this clientele group will most likely also decline. This dilemma is already being reported in the literature (2, 4). What does all this spell for clinical laboratory science education tomorrow? Since MLT-AD graduates currently number more than in 1982 (Table 1), the need for articulated MLT-MT programs is greater. The ability to implement such programs rests upon an educational expertise to clearly define the competencies of the two employment categories. Once this is done, the number of articulated programs in the clinical laboratory science area will likely increase. Over the years, MT program officials have attained a higher level of education. This factor is substantiated by comparing the academic credentials of program officials from 1979 through

© 1988ElsevierSciencePublishingCo., Inc.

1987 as listed in the AMA Directory of Allied Health Education Programs (1). More members of the ASMT's Education Scientific Assembly Section have masters' and doctoral degrees than in the past. These individuals are, for the most part, program officials of various MT programs across the nation. With this high level of educationally prepared faculty, the quality of clinical laboratory science education will likely increase in the future. With an increase in laboratory-related NAACLS approved programs, an opportunity will be created for educational leadership by academically prepared medical technologists. Medical technologists can serve not only as program officials but faculty members as well. The only impediment to growth in this area would be an inability to seize the occasion. If the number of NAACLS/CAHEA accredited programs stabilizes and the number of NAACLS approved programs and articulated programs increases, then it is plausible that many masters' degree MT educators will feel a need to go on for a doctorate. The creation of doctoral programs in MT will make this choice even more attractive. These two events will generate even more employment opportunities for MT educators. Overall, these factors spell out good news for MT education. The only inhibitors to a brighter future will be the limitations placed upon the profession by the professionals themselves. This can be avoided through a repeated and concerted effort of all MT educators to coalesce common goals and purposes. References

1. American Medical Association. Allied Health Education Directory. Chicago: American Medical Association, 1979-1987. 2. Belsey, R., R. K. Goitein, and D. M. Baer, 1987. Evaluation of a laboratory system intended for use in physicians' offices. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 258:353356. 3. Consortium for Clinical Laboratory Science Programs in Illinois. Unpublished study. 1987. 4. Lunz, M. E. et al. 1987. The impact of the quality of laboratory staff on the accuracy of laboratory results. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 258:361-363.

0196-4399/88/$0.00 + 02.20

69