Editorial by Buckley
Professional self regulation is at the heart of the organisation and philosophy of medical care in the United Kingdom. However, demands are growing for increasing transparency and accountability to patients in systems for ensuring doctors' standards. In response to this, the General Medical Council (GMC) has made a commitment to introduce periodic revalidation for all doctors on the medical register after 2002. Every five years all doctors will have to submit evidence that they are practising in accordance with clearly defined guidelines. There is debate about what methods of professional assessment are most closely linked with professional performance. In this article we describe an approach to establishing revalidation in the United Kingdom, highlighting areas of uncertainty and using examples of work in progress in general practice.
This article is based on our work in developing the performance procedures for general practitioners. The proposals are based on international guidelines for good practice in devising assessment programmes which emphasise the importance of using methods relevant to the purpose and content of the assessment.1 2
Revalidation will be a proactive, inclusive programme, designed to demonstrate that the performance of doctors is acceptable. It will apply to all doctors on the register, be conducted locally by peers and lay people, be monitored nationally by the GMC, and must be implemented with a “light touch” if it is to succeed.
It is essential that an assessment programme assesses what it purports to assess.1 Revalidation should therefore seek evidence of a safe standard of practice for all areas in which a doctor works, both clinical and managerial. This presents particular problems for specialist practice. There are professional debates about core competencies for specialists (for example, in diabetes or breast surgery) who are on call as generalists for patients being admitted to …
[1]
S. Tanenbaum.
Evidence and expertise: the challenge of the outcomes movement to medical professionalism.
,
1999,
Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.
[2]
R. Baker,et al.
Development of a questionnaire to assess patients' satisfaction with consultations in general practice.
,
1990,
The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.
[3]
A D Oxman,et al.
Changing physician performance. A systematic review of the effect of continuing medical education strategies.
,
1995,
JAMA.
[4]
D. Newble,et al.
The Certification and Recertification of Doctors: Issues in the Assessment of Clinical Competence
,
1994
.
[5]
J. Carline,et al.
Use of peer ratings to evaluate physician performance.
,
1993,
JAMA.
[6]
D. Black,et al.
General Internal Medicine and Specialty Medicine – Time to Rethink the Relationship
,
1999,
Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London.
[7]
G. Freeman,et al.
Quality at general practice consultations: cross sectional survey
,
1999,
BMJ.
[8]
D. Newble,et al.
Physician assessment pilot study for the royal australasian college of physicians
,
1996
.
[9]
Peter Orton,et al.
The New NHS: Modern and Dependable?
,
1998
.
[10]
J Gabbay,et al.
Performance indicators for primary care groups: an evidence based approach
,
1998,
BMJ.