The experiences of privately practising midwives in Australia who have been reported to the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency: A qualitative study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jo Hunter ◽  
Kathleen Dixon ◽  
Hannah G Dahlen
Health Policy ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 102 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 152-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gisselle Gallego ◽  
Robert Casey ◽  
Richard Norman ◽  
Stephen Goodall

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 353
Author(s):  
Claudette S. Satchell ◽  
Merrilyn Walton ◽  
Patrick J. Kelly ◽  
Elizabeth M. Chiarella ◽  
Suzanne M. Pierce ◽  
...  

In 2005, the Australian Productivity Commission made a recommendation that a national health registration regimen and a consolidated national accreditation regimen be established. On 1 July 2010, the National Registration and Accreditation Scheme (NRAS) for health practitioners came into effect and the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) became the single national oversight agency for health professional regulation. It is governed by the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Act (the National Law). While all states and territories joined NRAS for registration and accreditation, NSW did not join the scheme for the handling of complaints, but retained its existing co-regulatory complaint-handling system. All other states and territories joined the national notification (complaints) scheme prescribed in the National Law. Because the introduction of NRAS brings with it new processes and governance around the management of complaints that apply to all regulated health professionals in all states and territories except NSW, where complaints management remains largely unchanged, there is a need for comparative analysis of these differing national and NSW approaches to the management of complaints/notifications about health professionals, not only to allow transparency for consumers, but also to assess consistency of decision making around complaints/notifications across jurisdictions. This paper describes the similarities and differences for complaints/notifications handling between the NRAS and NSW schemes and briefly discusses subsequent and potential changes in other jurisdictions.


2021 ◽  
Vol 107 (2) ◽  
pp. 25-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Gee ◽  
Anne Tonkin ◽  
Sharon Gaby ◽  
Veronika Urh ◽  
Sarah Anderson ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT A sexual boundary violation by a health practitioner has an immense impact on a patient, and the trust and confidence in the health care system and the health care regulator are negatively affected. The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra) and the Medical Board of Australia (MBA) in 2017 commissioned an independent review in response to a specific high-profile case of multiple physician-patient* sexual boundary violations. In response to recommendations for process improvement, Ahpra and the MBA worked to transform the regulatory management of sexual boundary notifications.The purpose of this paper is to explore the structural and cultural changes that have been made to manage sexual boundary violation notifications and lessons learned through the process. Three factors — specialized decision-making, training for investigators and policy and cultural changes — were identified as key elements of the change process. Since the changes in 2017, the rate of immediate regulatory action taken in response to sexual boundary notifications has increased substantially, with a higher proportion of decisions resulting in suspension of a physician’s registration. Further work on the experience of those who are part of the notification process and supporting people to share their stories and experiences through the notification and tribunal process is ongoing.


2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 15
Author(s):  
Merrilyn Walton ◽  
Patrick J. Kelly ◽  
E. Mary Chiarella ◽  
Terry Carney ◽  
Belinda Bennett ◽  
...  

Objective The aims of this study were to profile the most common complaints and to examine whether any demographic factors are associated with receiving a complaint for five health professions in Australia. Methods A national cohort study was conducted for all complaints received for medicine, nursing/midwifery, dentistry, pharmacy and psychology from 1 July 2012 to 31 December 2013 (18 months). Data were collected from the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA), the New South Wales (NSW) Health Professional Councils’ Authority and the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission. The frequency and risk of complaints were summarised for the five professions and by demographic information. Results There were 545283 practitioners registered with AHPRA between 1 July 2012 and 31 December 2013, consisting of 20935 dentists, 101066 medical practitioners, 363040 nurses/midwives, 28370 pharmacists and 31872 psychologists. During the study period there were 12616 complaints, corresponding to an annual rate of 1.5 per 100 practitioners. Complaints were most common for doctors and dentists (5% per annum per practitioner) and least common for nurses/midwives (0.5% per annum per practitioner). Sex (P<0.01), age (P<0.01) and country of birth (P<0.01) were all associated with risk of complaint. The most common complaints were clinical care (44% of all complaints), medication (10%) and health impairment of the practitioner (8%). Types of complaints varied by profession, sex and age. Conclusions The risk of a complaint is low, but varies by profession and demographics. The types of complaints also vary by profession and demographics. Differences between professions is most likely driven by their different work tasks and work environments. What is already known on this subject? Although complaints are summarised annually from state and national health regulators, no overall national summary of complaints across professions exists. Thus, it is difficult to examine which complaints are most common, how professions differ from each other or what factors may be associated with risk and type of complaint. Previous studies have primarily focused on a single profession, such as medicine, where, for example, the number of prior complaints, sex, doctor speciality and age have been found to be associated with recurrent complaints. What does this paper add? This paper is the first of this kind to provide a national summary of all complaints from five of the most common health professions in Australia. We found that regardless of profession, men were at least twice as likely to have a complaint made against them than women. We also found that the types of complaint differed between men and women. There were similarities across professions for the most common types of complaints, but clear differences between professions were also noted. Not surprising, clinical care was typically the most common type of complaint for the five professions, but somewhat surprising was the inclusion of health impairment as one of the most common types of complaints. What are the implications for practitioners? Identifying the most common complaints, and the factors associated with these, may assist practitioners to understand their risk(s) of complaint and could potentially assist educators and regulators develop education programs that help reduce complaints.


2021 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 235
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Turtle ◽  
Anna Vnuk ◽  
Vivian Isaac

ObjectiveThis study examined the distribution of the sexes across Australian medical procedural specialties in 2017 and investigated the proportion of currently registered female specialists based on their graduation date from 1969 to 2008. MethodsA cross-sectional analysis of current Australian procedural and surgical specialists registered with the Australian Health Practitioner Registration Agency as of January 2017 was undertaken. Participants included 4851 surgical specialists (594 female, 4257 male) and 14948 specialists in specialties with high levels of procedural clinical work (4418 female, 10530 male). The number of male and female specialists across each procedural specialty and the medical school graduation date of current female specialists were analysed. ResultsIn 2017, female fellows represented only one in 10 surgeons and three in 10 procedural specialists. All surgical specialties are underrepresented by female specialists. Cardiology is least represented by female practitioners (one in 10), followed by intensive care and ophthalmology (two in 10). General surgery, otolaryngology and urology saw more female specialists with graduation dates between 1983 and 2003 compared with the other surgical specialties. ConclusionThe number of female practitioners registered as specialists is increasing, but they continue to be underrepresented at specialist level across many procedural and surgical specialties. What is known about the topic?Although the number of female students entering medical school now outnumbers that of males, female practitioners remain underrepresented at the specialist level. What does this paper add?Surgery continues to be underrepresented by female specialists, but general surgery, otolaryngology and urology have shown increases in females reaching specialist level. All procedural specialties have shown increasing numbers of female practitioners reaching the specialist level. What are the implications for practitioners?All surgical specialties and nearly all procedural specialties need to adopt evidence-based practices to make their training programs both appealing and sustainable to female trainees in order to work towards achieving gender parity.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 217-233
Author(s):  
Elaine Jefford ◽  
Samantha J. Nolan ◽  
Julie Jomeen

BACKGROUNDThis review builds upon previous work exploring the concept of Midwifery Abdication, within the national midwifery literature. This article focuses on Australian legal literature, court/tribunal decisions and coronial or coroner's court findings.OBJECTIVETo explore Midwifery Abdication and whether it is evident within Australian caselaw.DATA SOURCESAustralian Legal literature, coronial findings, and court/tribunal decisions reported by the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency, during 2005–2020.ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA1,246 cases were located using the presented search terms. Use of exclusion criteria resulted in the inclusion of 41 cases.METHODSWhile there are no validated tools to appraise caselaw, this review followed a robust protocol that guides the preparation and reporting of systematic reviews. Midwifery Abdication was identified using previously validated, interrelated constructs.RESULTSMidwifery Abdication occurred in 41 cases; that included one or more previously identified constructs. In line with the associated integrative review, a midwife's professional identity, environmental hierarchy and associated culture of social obedience are all shown to act as influencing factors in Midwifery Abdication.LIMITATIONSRigorous and reproducible processes were used; however, limited search functionality of some data sources may have resulted in inadvertent omission of cases. While this review relates to case law in one high-income country it provides a platform for further international research.CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGSAcknowledging Midwifery Abdication in Australian caselaw may serve to strengthen the midwifery voice and encourage an enhanced educational and reflective focus on midwifery philosophy and decision-making. Midwifery education must empower midwives to embrace their autonomous status while enhancing their abilities to optimize informed decision-making within a woman-centered midwifery philosophy.


2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudette S. Satchell ◽  
Merrilyn Walton ◽  
Patrick J. Kelly ◽  
Elizabeth M. Chiarella ◽  
Suzanne M. Pierce ◽  
...  

In 2005, the Australian Productivity Commission made a recommendation that a national health registration regimen and a consolidated national accreditation regimen be established. On 1 July 2010, the National Registration and Accreditation Scheme (NRAS) for health practitioners came into effect and the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) became the single national oversight agency for health professional regulation. It is governed by the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Act (the National Law). While all states and territories joined NRAS for registration and accreditation, NSW did not join the scheme for the handling of complaints, but retained its existing co-regulatory complaint-handling system. All other states and territories joined the national notification (complaints) scheme prescribed in the National Law. Because the introduction of NRAS brings with it new processes and governance around the management of complaints that apply to all regulated health professionals in all states and territories except NSW, where complaints management remains largely unchanged, there is a need for comparative analysis of these differing national and NSW approaches to the management of complaints/notifications about health professionals, not only to allow transparency for consumers, but also to assess consistency of decision making around complaints/notifications across jurisdictions. This paper describes the similarities and differences for complaints/notifications handling between the NRAS and NSW schemes and briefly discusses subsequent and potential changes in other jurisdictions.


2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie M. Bismark ◽  
Martin Fletcher ◽  
Matthew J. Spittal ◽  
David M. Studdert

In 2010 Australia established a national registration and accreditation scheme, covering more than 620000 health practitioners. The data held by the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency is a remarkable platform for research aimed at improving health practitioner regulation, health care quality and workforce planning.


2019 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brett Williams ◽  
Tanya Edlington

BackgroundIn December 2018 Australian paramedics and the paramedicine discipline became nationally registered under the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA). Paramedics are now required to register and satisfy registration requirements in order to work as a paramedic. One of the mandatory registration standards is continuing professional development (CPD). This study examines attitudes and perceptions held by Australian paramedics in relation to CPD. MethodsA qualitative research project was undertaken using semi-structured interviews. A purposive snowballing sampling technique was employed to invite paramedics currently working in Australia to participate in telephone-based interviews. Data were analysed using a thematic analysis approach. The transcripts were read several times to determine repeated themes and these themes were then coded by two authors. Data saturation was considered to have occurred after 18 interviews. ResultsEighteen paramedics responded and were interviewed; 16 of the respondents were male with the majority coming from Victoria. Broadly, four key themes were identified from analysis of the interviews. These included: 1) identification of CPD activities and requirements, 2) motivation, 3) factors influencing choice of activity, and 4) barriers.ConclusionThere was general acceptance of the need for paramedics to stay up-to-date with current practice. Generally, this was seen as a responsibility of the employer but some individuals made the distinction between employment requirements and professional requirements. We would encourage ongoing research in this area particularly as CPD develops over time for paramedicine in Australia.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document