Search

This paper will identify existing models of professional regulatory reform that could ensure a single licensing process that results in multi-jurisdictional licensure. The paper will also distinguish models or ad hoc arrangements that fail to achieve such a result. This is a timely topic in Canada because its professional regulatory framework is being examined for modernization. The Canadian professional regulatory framework for health care providers is a legacy of the Constitution of 1867. It can be characterized as a Federation of 13 different jurisdictional systems with each province or territory having exclusive jurisdiction over regulation of its health professionals. This results in differing entry to practice requirements, standards of practice, classes or categories of registration and transfer criteria for eligibility from other provinces. The United States nursing state board regulators, the Australian Commonwealth, and their state governments have moved from their original regulatory frameworks to modern ones. Their models are more supportive of mobility, cross-border virtual care, education, and health provider professional development and well-being. Aside from recent discussions in the 4 Canadian Atlantic provinces, there has been little will, effort, or advancement to modernize the regulatory framework in Canada to support multi-jurisdictional licensure. This paper aims to briefly describe 6 existing models that support multijurisdictional licensure. In the fall of 2022, the 4 Atlantic Premiers (akin to state Governors in the US) asked each of their medical regulatory authority (akin to State Medical Boards) to develop a licensing system such that physicians could practice in all 4 Atlantic provinces without the need to acquire multiple licenses. Two models will be discussed that meet this recently stated objective of the Atlantic Premiers while the others do not. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Schizophrenia is a global concern, and, this paper, describes the caring roles of health professionals who are mothers of adult children with schizophrenia. A thematic analysis of data from a doctoral study identified a blending of expertise into an informed care model. Caring roles included: constant carer; coordinator carer; watchful bystander carer; and life coach carer. Previous research has not explored these dual roles. This paper elucidates their responsive approaches and contributions to mothering and caregiving roles. Informed by a fusion of professional and mothering knowledges, their insights into mental health care have been forged by their experiences and is an untapped resource. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to critically analyse the concept of mandatory reporting in adult safeguarding in the jurisdictions of Australia, Canada, England, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Design/methodology/approach: A rapid realist evaluation of the literature on this topic was carried out in order to answer the question: "what works, for whom and in what circumstances?" Particular attention was paid to Context(s), Mechanism(s) and Outcome(s) configurations of adult safeguarding reporting systems and processes. Findings: The evaluation found a range of arguments for and against mandatory reporting and international variations on the scope and powers of mandatory reporting. Research limitations/implications: This review was undertaken in late 2018 so subsequent policy and practice developments will be missing from the evaluation. The evaluation focussed on five jurisdictions therefore, the findings are not necessarily translatable to other contexts. Practical implications: Some jurisdictions have introduced mandatory reporting and others are considering doing so. The potential advantages and challenges of introducing mandatory reporting are highlighted. Social implications: The introduction of mandatory reporting may offer professionals increased powers to prevent and reduce the abuse of adults, but this could also change the dynamic of relationships within families, and between families and professionals. Originality/value: This paper provides an accessible discussion of mandatory reporting across Ireland and internationally which to date has been lacking from the literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient safety in primary care is an emerging field of research with a growing evidence base in western countries but little has been explored in the Gulf Cooperation Council Countries (GCC) including the Sultanate of Oman. This study aimed to review the literature on the safety culture and patient safety measures used globally to inform the development of safety culture among health care workers in primary care with a particular focus on the Middle East. Methods: A systematic review of the literature. Searches were undertaken using Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and Scopus from the year 2000 to 2014. Terms defining safety culture were combined with terms identifying patient safety and primary care. Results: The database searches identified 3072 papers that were screened for inclusion in the review. After the screening and verification, data were extracted from 28 papers that described safety culture in primary care. The global distribution of the articles is as follows: the Netherlands (7), the United States (5), Germany (4), the United Kingdom (1), Australia, Canada and Brazil (two for each country), and with one each from Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. The characteristics of the included studies were grouped under the following themes: safety culture in primary care, incident reporting, safety climate and adverse events. The most common theme from 2011 onwards was the assessment of safety culture in primary care (13 studies, 46%). The most commonly used safety culture assessment tool is the Hospital survey on patient safety culture (HSOPSC) which has been used in developing countries in the Middle East. Conclusions: This systematic review reveals that the most important first step is the assessment of safety culture in primary care which will provide a basic understanding to safety-related perceptions of health care providers. The HSOPSC has been commonly used in Kuwait, Turkey, and Iran. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]