Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPrice, Ten
dc.contributor.authorArcher, Jen
dc.date.accessioned2017-12-01T12:54:28Z
dc.date.accessioned2018-02-07T18:26:45Z
dc.date.accessioned2018-02-19T11:35:06Z
dc.date.available2017-12-01T12:54:28Z
dc.date.available2018-02-07T18:26:45Z
dc.date.available2018-02-19T11:35:06Z
dc.date.issued2017en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/10815
dc.description.abstract

Around the world, policy-makers, academics, and health service professionals have become increasingly aware of the importance of remediation, the process by which poor performance is "remedied," as part of the changing landscape of medical regulation. It is, therefore, an opportune time to critique the UK experience with remediation policy. This article frames, for the first time, the UK remediation policy as developing from a central policy aim that was articulated in the 1990s: to accelerate the identification of underperformance and, subsequently, remedy any problems identified as soon as possible. In pursuit of this aim, three policy trajectories have emerged: professionalizing and standardizing remediation provision; linking remediation with other forms of regulation, namely relicensure (known in the UK as medical revalidation); and fostering obligations for doctors to report themselves and others for remediation needs. The operationalization of policy along these trajectories, and the challenges that have arisen, has relevance for anyone seeking to understand or indeed improve remediation practices within any health care system. It is argued here that the UK serves as an example of the more general challenges posed by seeking to integrate remediation policy within broader frameworks of medical governance, in particular systems of relicensure, and the need to develop a solid evidence base for remediation practices.

en
dc.format.extent207 - 211en
dc.languageengen
dc.language.isoengen
dc.relation.replaceshttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/10356
dc.relation.replaces10026.1/10356
dc.relation.replaceshttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/10751
dc.relation.replaces10026.1/10751
dc.subjectClinical Competenceen
dc.subjectHumansen
dc.subjectInterprofessional Relationsen
dc.subjectPhysiciansen
dc.subjectQuality Assurance, Health Careen
dc.subjectState Medicineen
dc.subjectUnited Kingdomen
dc.subjectWork Performanceen
dc.titleUK Policy on Doctor Remediation: Trajectories and Challenges.en
dc.typeJournal Article
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28834848en
plymouth.issue3en
plymouth.volume37en
plymouth.publication-statusPublisheden
plymouth.journalJ Contin Educ Health Profen
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/CEH.0000000000000167en
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/Peninsula Medical School
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA23 Education
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen
dc.identifier.eissn1554-558Xen
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot knownen
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1097/CEH.0000000000000167en
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserveden
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
@mire NV