CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT: CONSULTATION OUTCOMES

Transcription

1 CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT: CONSULTATION OUTCOMES IN NOVEMBER 2016 THE BOARD PUBLISHED A CONSULTATION DOCUMENT OUTLINING A PROPOSAL TO CHANGE ITS REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR MEDICAL IMAGING AND RADIATION THERAPY PRACTITIONERS. THIS REPORT PROVIDES A SUMMARY OF THE KEY THEMES OF THE CONSULTATION FEEDBACK, AND THE BOARD S FINAL DECISION AS TO ITS CPD REQUIREMENTS FROM 1 ST 2017 APRIL MARCH 1, 2017

2 Consultation Overview The Board s 2016 review of its recertification requirements (of which CPD is a critical component) for medical imaging and radiation therapy practitioners included a number of proposals. Feedback on those proposals was then sought via a public consultation process. Feedback was framed around five questions accessed through an online survey questionnaire: 1. Do you have any comments regarding the number of CPD hours required? 2. Do you have any comments regarding CPD being managed through fixed triennium periods? 3. Do you require further clarification or information regarding substantive versus general CPD activities? 4. Do you require further clarification or information regarding keeping CPD records? 5. What information would be helpful for you in respect of CPD audits undertaken by the Board? Survey Responses: The Statistics Initial responses totalled 710, however this reduced to 589 valid submissions, and six of the latter were from groups. The differential was due to 121 responses either not answering any of the five questions, or being duplicate submissions. Table 1 shows the number of respondents who provided feedback to each of the five questions, and these have been further categorised according to specific scopes of practice for individual respondents and the number of responses received from groups. Table 1: A Quick Glance Question MIT MRIT NMT RT Son Dual Scopes Groups TOTAL Page 1

3 In addition to extrapolating key themes/messages pertaining to each of the questions, all submissions were analysed as to whether respondents had indicated whether they were accepting of the proposal, not accepting of the proposal, or had not given an indication either way (for want of a better term, this has been reported as indifferent ) Page 2

4 Question One: CPD Hours Indifferent % Acceptable % Not acceptabe 62 13% Five recurring themes emerged in response to the question pertaining to the proposal that practitioners would need to complete a total of 60 CPD hours over a 3-year (triennium) period. Furthermore they would need to complete a minimum of 10 CPD hours in any one year of the relevant triennium. Reference Consultation Feedback Board s Consideration Theme 1 Theme 2 Theme 3 Practitioners practising part-time should not have to do the same amount of CPD as those who work fulltime Practitioners are required to complete most of their CPD in their own time and this impacts on their work-life balance Specifying hours can be difficult especially as what might take one person an hour to complete could take another person two hours The Board has looked at the amount of CPD required of other health professionals, both within New Zealand and overseas, and considers 60 hours over a triennium to be a reasonable requirement. In practical terms this represents an increase of 5 hours in any one year, and the Board considers this to be neither unreasonable nor unachievable. As with many other professional groups, there is a worldwide expectation registered health professionals will actively engage in CPD. Ongoing and lifelong learning is the hallmark of a professional and serves to not only better protect the health and safety of the public it also provides a structured framework for practitioners to improve their practice and can be a positive influencer in terms of career aspirations. CPD is not all about the time one clocks up. A critical aspect of CPD is that practitioners can demonstrate they have engaged in reflective practice. It is true that what may take one practitioner 2-hours to complete could be completed by another practitioner in only 1-hour. However the underpinning principle that a Board audit would consider is in terms of the learning that took place for each of those practitioners. Page 3

5 Reference Consultation Feedback Board s Consideration Theme 4 More clarity is needed in terms of practitioners who hold dual scopes and the required CPD for each scope Practitioners holding dual scopes must meet two different criteria in terms of minimum hours. Firstly, they are required to complete a minimum number of clinical practice hours within a relevant triennium. That is, they must have practised a total of 880 hours in a clinical role across the 3-year period. Of those clinical hours, 360 hours must have involved direct patient contact in each of their dual scopes i.e. a total of 720 patient contact hours. The remaining 160 hours can be made up of other profession-related activities including patient contact, education, research, and supervision. In addition dual-scope practitioners must demonstrate their CPD activities for the relevant triennium is inclusive of at least 35- hours of CPD activities considered as substantive. There is no requirement for those 35-substantive-CPD-hours to be equally or proportionately spread across the practitioner s dual scopes. The Board entrusts each dual-scoped practitioner to consider their individually-identified learning needs and engage in CPD activities that are in line with those. This may mean that in one-year a practitioner engages in CPD specifically related to just one of their scopes but in another year their CPD relates to the other scope and/or a combination of their dual scopes. The most important consideration is an ability to demonstrate how their ongoing engagement in CPD is contributing to the development of their professional practice. As registered health practitioners they are expected to make every effort to ensure their choice of CPD activities are aligned to both of the scopes within they are practising. Theme 5 Access to a range of CPD activities can be difficult Balancing a number of arenas in one s life is typical for the majority of people in today s busy world and is not restricted to those who have chosen to work in the area of health service delivery. When revising its recertification programme requirements, the Board has endeavoured to provide a broad range of examples that can count as CPD activities. The Board is confident this will assist practitioners with being able to access sufficient and appropriate CPD activities, as will the fact that as a minimum an individual only has to complete 60 hours of CPD over a 3-year period. On average this equates to less than 2-hours per calendar month. The Board does not consider this to be onerous. Page 4

6 Question 2: CPD to be Managed Within Fixed Triennium Periods Undeterminable % Acceptable % Unacceptable 88 21% Recurring themes related to the proposal that practitioners would be required through to manage their CPD within a fixed triennium included: Theme 1 Theme 2 Theme 3 3-years is long time to wait for feedback on the CPD undertaken Will practitioners taking long-term leave be able to apply for an exemption? What do we need to do to transition from our current CPD programme cycle to a fixed triennium? The Board s Consideration of the Themes The Board s publication that sets out the detail of its revised CPD requirements (Recertification Programme for Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy Practitioners, March 2017). This includes an explanation that practitioners who do not hold an APC (this will be inclusive of those on long-term leave) do not have to meet the mandatory recertification requirements, however continuing to engage in CPD while on leave is encouraged as it can be of benefit to practitioners in the longer term. The recertification programme document also includes detail on transitioning to the new requirements. Page 5

7 Question 3: Substantive and General CPD Activities Does not need clarification % Needs clarification % Undeterminable 85 18% While there were no particular recurring themes in response to this question that is, is more clarity and/or information required in respect of classifying CPD as substantive or general there were a number of queries noted by the Board. Reference Query Board s Consideration/Response Query 1 Query 2 Query 3 Query 4 Cultural courses should be re-classified as substantive CPD. Increasing awareness and skills in, for example, Tikanga Maori is crucial to performing our clinical roles in Aotearoa New Zealand The table of differences between substantive and general CPD is not very clear What happens if I class a particular CPD activity as being in one category but the Board regards it as belonging in the other and that then affects my final split of substantive vs general CPD hours? There will be a great deal of advice sought by practitioners. The NZIMRT offer advice on CPD and this will become a Board task which will require staff who can give feedback There is an expectation for practitioners to include evidence that their CPD activities contain learning relating to cultural competence. The Board agrees that cultural competence is related to substantive CPD activity and has now included this into the list of substantive CPD activities The Board sees the current table as a reasonable starting point. We will continue to communicate with the profession to improve this over time The Board will give every consideration to situations where a practitioner has identified a particular CPD activity as more appropriately being classed as substantive as opposed to general (or vice versa). The practitioner would need to provide a reasonable explanation for the change including any supporting documentation (if appropriate) The Board will make every effort to answer practitioner queries. We expect that the development of an online reference library will go some way in assisting practitioners managing their CPD in the future Page 6

8 Reference Query Board s Consideration/Response Query 5 Query 6 Is it compulsory to complete 25 hours on general CPD or can we do more hours of substantive CPD? Is there any way of knowing in advance (without being audited) that we are on track with our CPD, so that we don t have to wait until we come up for audit? No. You can choose to more hours of substantive CPD and thereby reduce your hours of general CPD to achieve the minimum total of 60 hours CPD across any one triennium The Board suggests that peer discussion groups and/or peer reviews are a good mechanism for evaluating your CPD efforts Page 7

9 Question 4: Information on Keeping CPD Records Does not need clarification % Needs clarification 71 15% Undeterminable 39 8% Several responses centred on a number of similar themes: Theme 1 Theme 2 Theme 3 An online option for practitioners to record their CPD would be helpful Could the Board provide more templates and exemplars More information on the Board s expectations regarding reflective statements would be helpful Board s Consideration of Feedback Relating to Information on CPD Records Over the next few months the Board will develop a library of CPD reference material that will be available to practitioners through the Board s website. The Board will include an investigation of online recording options in its business plan. In the meantime there are many CPD recording programmes available through the open internet that practitioners can use. We will provide some examples of those as a component of the CPD reference library on the Board website. Many providers of CPD programmes have an online recording facility for programme participants and it is expected this will continue to be offered for those practitioners who choose to remain with/enrol in one of these programmes. Question Five: Audits The Board s publication pertaining to the recertification requirements (Recertification Programme for Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy Practitioners March 2017) includes a detailed section on the requirements and processes of a recertification audit. Page 8

10 Recertification or CPD Which is the Correct Terminology? A significant difference between the information contained in the Board s consultation document and the final document that sets out the Board s requirements is in respect of the introduction of the term recertification programme rather than a singular reference to CPD. Using the term recertification aligns with the Board s responsibilities under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act Section 41 of the Act enables the Board to set or recognise recertification programmes for practitioners as a mechanism for ensuring they are competent to practise within their scopes of practice. The term recertification programme refers to all of the measures the Board undertakes to monitor individual practitioners ongoing competence. While CPD is a critical and underpinning feature of the Board s recertification programme, the latter contains a number of other measures to assist with gauging practitioner competence. The following table summarises the key features of the Board s recertification programme: An Overview of Mandatory Recertification Requirements Minimum of formally recorded CPD hours per triennium Minimum of formally recorded CPD hours in any one year Evidence of a minimum amount of substantive CPD activities in each triennium Declaration that you have completed a minimum number of clinical practice hours per triennium Maintain detailed and verifiable records for all CPD activities for a period of four years (for any one triennium) Provide supporting evidential documents confirming your engagement in CPD activities 60 hours 10 hours 35 hours 880 hours At least 10 supporting documents and 6 of those for substantive CPD activities Confirmation of a peer performance review within the previous 12-month period Page 9

11 Additional Information Many respondents requested further information especially in respect of CPD reference material to assist them with recording CPD activities, and planning for a recertification audit. The Board will be developing a series of informational material (inclusive of a selection of practical examples) over the next few months in respect of CPD and practitioners will be alerted as to when these become available through the Board s website. Page 10

12 Medical Radiation Technologists Board Decision After due consideration of all consultation feedback the Board has now agreed on the revised recertification programme that will be required of all medical imaging and radiation therapy practitioners, effective from 1 st April A separate document titled Recertification Programme for Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy Practitioners (dated March 2017) has been published and is available on the Board s website at To conclude, the Board very much appreciates the input from the many practitioners who have taken the time to consider and respond to the recertification (CPD) document. The information received through the consultation process has been invaluable in assisting the Board with the subsequent development of informational material in respect of the recertification requirements for medical imaging and radiation therapy practitioners which will come into effect from 1 st April We look forward to building on this information in the form of a recertification reference library in the near future. Page 11