Do the public think medical regulation keep them safe?. (8th December 2017)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Do the public think medical regulation keep them safe?. (8th December 2017)
- Main Title:
- Do the public think medical regulation keep them safe?
- Authors:
- Yam, Carrie Ho-kwan
Wong, Eliza Lai-yi
Griffiths, Sian M
Yeoh, Eng-kiong - Abstract:
- Abstract: Objective: To assess public knowledge and expectations of the ways to assess doctors' competence to ensure patient safety. Design setting and participants: Telephone survey of a random sample of 1000 non-institutionalized Hong Kong residents. Measures and results: Only 5% of public were correct that doctors are not required to periodically be assessed, and 9% were correct that the doctors are not required to update knowledge and skills for renewing their license. These results echo international studies showing a low public knowledge of medical regulation. The public overwhelmingly felt a periodic assessment (92%) and requirements for continuous medical education (91%) were important processes for assuring doctors' competence. A high proportion of the public felt that lay representation in the Medical Council was insufficient. Conclusion: There is a significant gap between public expectations and understanding of the existing medical regulation and the actual policies and practices. Despite a lack of public knowledge, the public thought it important to have an ongoing structured monitoring and assessment mechanism to assure doctors' competence. The public also expects a greater involvement in the regulatory processes as members of the Medical Council. There is a need to review and enhance the current regulatory system to meet public expectation and ensure accountability for the privilege and trust granted by the State in professional self-regulation. In the contextAbstract: Objective: To assess public knowledge and expectations of the ways to assess doctors' competence to ensure patient safety. Design setting and participants: Telephone survey of a random sample of 1000 non-institutionalized Hong Kong residents. Measures and results: Only 5% of public were correct that doctors are not required to periodically be assessed, and 9% were correct that the doctors are not required to update knowledge and skills for renewing their license. These results echo international studies showing a low public knowledge of medical regulation. The public overwhelmingly felt a periodic assessment (92%) and requirements for continuous medical education (91%) were important processes for assuring doctors' competence. A high proportion of the public felt that lay representation in the Medical Council was insufficient. Conclusion: There is a significant gap between public expectations and understanding of the existing medical regulation and the actual policies and practices. Despite a lack of public knowledge, the public thought it important to have an ongoing structured monitoring and assessment mechanism to assure doctors' competence. The public also expects a greater involvement in the regulatory processes as members of the Medical Council. There is a need to review and enhance the current regulatory system to meet public expectation and ensure accountability for the privilege and trust granted by the State in professional self-regulation. In the context of our complex health system, a thorough understanding on the dynamic interactions between different institutions and their complementary roles in a meta-regulatory framework is required in assuring patient safety. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- International journal for quality in health care. Volume 30:Number 2(2018:Feb.)
- Journal:
- International journal for quality in health care
- Issue:
- Volume 30:Number 2(2018:Feb.)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 30, Issue 2 (2018)
- Year:
- 2018
- Volume:
- 30
- Issue:
- 2
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2018-0030-0002-0000
- Page Start:
- 90
- Page End:
- 96
- Publication Date:
- 2017-12-08
- Subjects:
- medical regulation -- monitoring and assessment mechanism -- lay representation
Medical care -- Quality control -- Periodicals
362.1068 - Journal URLs:
- http://intqhc.oxfordjournals.org/ ↗
http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/ ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1093/intqhc/mzx164 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 1353-4505
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 4542.510500
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 12287.xml