GMC “tried to water down rules on physician associates” – Telegraph

The Telegraph reported that the GMC “fought against guidance intended to improve supervision and protect patients from harm, saying it was too ‘burdensome’.”

According to the report, documents seen by The Telegraph show the GMC fought against guidance intended to improve supervision of the workers and protect patients from further harm, saying it was too “burdensome”. In a letter seen by The Telegraph, the GMC said: “We are also concerned that the guidance on PA supervision and scope of practice appear in places to be somewhat burdensome and restrictive, to the extent that, if adopted as drafted, it could have the effect of dissuading employers from employing PAs.”

The Telegraph reported that “while the new guidance was being put together, the General Medical Council (GMC) lobbied to make the proposals less “restrictive” over fears they would reduce the profession’s employability.”

Responding, Prof Phil Banfield, BMA chair of council said:

 “Robust national scopes of practice are the basis of any solution to the dangers to patient safety raised by the way PAs are currently employed in the NHS. It has been worrying to see the GMC, a patient safety regulator, resist all calls to publish its take on the Royal Colleges’ attempt to set these scopes. As it begins to regulate PAs, the public deserves to know what it thinks they can and can’t do.

“After refusing to release these opinions for months it tried to do so quietly just before Christmas. It is now clear why it wanted to hide them. They have astonishingly tried to claim that national scopes of practice should not be “burdensome and restrictive” on PAs in case it might lead to employers thinking twice before hiring them.

“The GMC will need to explain why it is pressuring royal colleges to set laxer standards for PAs in order to make them easier to hire.  

“Let’s be clear: patient safety should be the only priority when defining what PAs can do, not their employment prospects. Keeping patients safe is not burdensome – it is essential.

“The GMC goes to extraordinary lengths to control which doctors can enter postgraduate training and the clinical standards for doctors to be regarded as a fully trained general practitioner or consultant, but has washed its hands when it comes to PAs. It is difficult to imagine another regulator saying proper safeguards are too much of a burden over such a fundamental safety issue.”

A spokesman for the GMC denied it had published its responses quietly and said it had done so “as soon as the Royal Colleges published their scope documents”.

“Our regulation of these professions will strengthen patient safety by specifying the minimum knowledge, skills and capabilities PAs and AAs must have to begin practising in the UK. PAs and AAs will now need to demonstrate that they have met the standards we set by sitting and passing a two-part assessment of their clinical knowledge and skills before they can register with us. They can also be held to account if serious concerns are raised about their practice,” they said.

“Like other professional healthcare regulators, it is not appropriate for us to provide advice on how PAs and AAs might develop their skills and competencies over time.”

Disclaimer: The accuracy and information of news stories published on this website is accurate on the date of publishing. We endeavour to update stories if information change. You can contact us with change and update requests. Where possible, we will link to sources. Content on this website is for guidance purposes only. We cannot accept any responsibility or liability whatsoever for any action taken, or not taken. You should seek the appropriate legal advice having regard to your own particular circumstances.