Medical Defence Union (MDU) Says Revalidation Must Be Fair And Evidence-Based, UK

Main Category: Primary Care / General Practice
Article Date: 25 Jul 2008 - 1:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

Following the publication of the Chief Medical Officer's (CMO) Report, Medical Revalidation - Principles and Next Steps, today the MDU welcomes the plans for robust and evidence based assessments of doctors and will work on behalf of our members to ensure that revalidation delivers this.

Dr Hugh Stewart, Head of case decisions at the MDU said: "We have always said that any scheme for the appraisal and revalidation of doctors needs to help them develop in their roles and for the few doctors where concerns are identified, help these to be addressed in a fair and constructive way. We are pleased that the CMO has said that the primary focus of revalidation must be to support doctors to develop their own talents, rather than solely to detect the small proportion of doctors who cause concern (paragraph 2.10).

"The vast majority of doctors are extremely hard-working professionals and already held accountable in more ways than other UK professions. It would be inappropriate to introduce a time-consuming process that keeps doctors away from their patients and we welcome the assurance that the burden of revalidation will be minimised, for example, the proposal that relicensure and recertification will draw on largely the same evidence (paragraph 5.10).

"We agree that the revalidation process must be efficient, fair, free from discrimination, command the confidence of patients, employers and the profession and draw on the expertise of different stakeholder groups. To this end we strongly support the CMO's statement that decisions about doctors' ability to practice are not taken by individuals in isolation or based on informal discussion and agreements and that clear accountability for these individuals must be in place (paragraph 5.11). There must also be robust mechanisms for a doctor to challenge any decision that may affect his or her ability to practice medicine.

"We note that in paragraph 14.4, the CMO says that 'the sense of urgency and desire to make progress must be balanced with the need to get it right'. There is no need for urgency and doctors' rights must not be compromised by artificial deadlines. We wholly support this sentiment and the need for a careful, incremental approach to rolling out the new system. The MDU looks forward to being fully involved in the process on behalf of members to ensure that the process is robust and fairly implemented."

The MDU also highlighted one other point of interest to emerge from the CMO's document. Paragraph 3.2 says that subject to Parliamentary agreement, in 2009 legislation will take effect to ensure that all licensed doctors have adequate and appropriate indemnity insurance and that this will have to be demonstrated in order to obtain a license to practice. The MDU welcomes this commitment as we believe that patients should be able to claim any compensation rightfully due to them and that only a regulated insurance policy represents adequate safeguards for practitioners and their patients.

The MDU is a mutual, not for profit, organisation owned by our members who include over 50 per cent of the UK's hospital doctors and GPs. Established in 1885, we were the world's first medical defence organisation. We defend the professional reputations of our members when their clinical performance is called into question. Our benefits of membership include insurance for claims of clinical negligence and a wide range of medico-legal advisory services.

Source:
The MDU - the UK's leading medical defence organisation.
http://www.the-mdu.com

• Additional
• References
• Citations