Path to Enhanced National Accreditation of Basic Medical Education Programs in Libya

As Libya continues to strive for excellence in healthcare, national accreditation plays a pivotal role in shaping the future of medical education and improving patient outcomes. In order to realize this objective, greater collaboration has to be maintained between local medical colleges, the National Center for Quality Assurance and Accreditation of Educational and Training Institutions, and other stakeholders. This study aimed to overcome the challenges and barriers medical colleges face in securing the national accreditation of basic medical education programs offered locally. This study critically reviewed the national accreditation process of basic medical education programs offered in Libya. This includes highlighting any weaknesses or shortcomings in the audit process and suggesting means to improve this process. In terms of the methodology followed, this study was survey-based. The questionnaire consisted of three parts covering different audit process aspects. Several key areas for improvement are highlighted as a result. The data was collected through survey auditors. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 27 and a significance level of p < 0.05 was used. Most of the questionnaire respondents were from the University of Benghazi and the University of Zawia. 57.9% of respondents hold PhD degrees. The majority of respondents (57.9%) disagree or strongly disagree on having enough time to review documents; however, 84.2% strongly agree or agree that team size is appropriate. Over 70% agreed there is vague, unclear language in some indicators, and 94.8% agreed that there are similarities and redundancies between some indicators across standards. On the other hand, 31.6% of auditors cited challenges with standard 7, making it the most problematic. Standards 2 and 9 also posed considerable issues based on facing difficulties for 21.1% of auditors. Standard 2 stands out as lacking alignment between program evidence provisions and indicator requirements according to 63.2% of auditors. Focusing on the audit process in all aspects and correcting any areas of weakness would improve the clarity, uniformity, and fairness of the national accreditation process.