Continuing Medical Education in Georgia: Reform or Rubber Stamp?

Georgia’s continuing medical education system requires physicians to accumulate credits — but evidence of genuine competency improvement is absent. PHIG asks whether the current CME framework is a rubber stamp or a quality assurance mechanism.

“Mandatory continuing education that is not linked to any measurable change in clinical practice is an administrative exercise, not a quality improvement mechanism. Georgia’s CME system, as currently designed, is the former.”

Pkhakadze G. CME Reform Analysis Georgia. Tbilisi: PHIG; 2025.[1]

Introduction

Continuing Medical Education (CME) and Continuing Professional Development (CPD) are the post-licensure mechanisms by which health systems assure that practising physicians maintain and enhance their competencies throughout their careers. In Georgia, all licensed physicians are required to complete 60 credit hours of approved CME activity per triennial attestation period.[2] This requirement, introduced as part of the 2010 Law on Healthcare amendments, represents a significant policy step. The question this analysis addresses is whether the current CME framework translates credits into competency.

The Rubber Stamp Problem

PHIG’s 2024 review of CME delivery found that 61% of Georgian physicians completed all or the majority of their CME requirements through online modules with no formative or summative assessment component — credits were awarded for time spent, not for demonstrated learning.[1] Only 8% of CME activities included any form of competency check, and none linked CME outcomes to observable changes in clinical practice.

This contrasts with the European Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (EACCME) framework, which requires that accredited CME activities include learning objectives, educational methods appropriate to those objectives, and participant feedback mechanisms. Of the 214 Georgian CME providers, only 12 are UEMS-EACCME accredited as of 2024.[3]

Figure 1. CME Quality Components: Georgian CME Activities 2024 vs. EACCME Standards (% of activities)

Sources: PHIG CME audit 2024; UEMS-EACCME accreditation criteria 2023.[1,3]

Figure 2. CME Delivery Format Distribution: Georgia 2024 (% of accredited activities)

Conclusion

Georgia’s CME system fulfils its administrative function — physicians accumulate credits and pass attestation — but does not fulfil its quality assurance function. The reform needed is not more credits; it is a shift from input-based to outcome-based CME, with accredited provider standards, mandatory participant assessment for at least 30% of credits, and linkage to the competency framework that PHIG recommends establishing nationally as part of the CBME transition. PHIG’s work with ASF on training standards, and its partnership with the GMJ Academy for accredited online learning, positions it to support this reform directly.

References

1. Pkhakadze G. CME Reform Analysis: Georgia 2024. Tbilisi: PHIG; 2025.
2. Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs of Georgia. Continuing Medical Education Regulation (Order No. 1084). Tbilisi: MoLHSA; 2023.
3. European Union of Medical Specialists — European Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education. EACCME Accreditation Criteria 2023. Brussels: UEMS; 2023.
4. Cervero RM, Gaines JK. The impact of CME on physician performance and patient health outcomes: an updated synthesis of systematic reviews. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2015;35(2):131–8.
5. GMJ Academy. Continuing Medical Education Catalogue 2024. Tbilisi: GMJ; 2024. Available from: https://academy.gmj.ge

Prof. Giorgi Pkhakadze, MD, MPH, PhD

Professor of Public Health, David Tvildiani Medical University | Chair, Public Health Institute of Georgia | Founder, Accréditation Sans Frontières

Published on behalf of the PHIG Analysis and Intelligence Team · Tbilisi, Georgia

PHIG

Public Health Institute of Georgia