Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34412640›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

Living life in limbo: experiences of healthcare professionals during the HCPC fitness to practice investigation process in the UK.

Jill Maben, Linda Hoinville, Dawn Querstret, Cath Taylor, Magdalena Zasada, Ruth Abrams

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jill MabenSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Kate Granger Building, Priestley Road, Surrey Research Park, GU2 7YH, Guildford, UK. j.maben@surrey.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6168-0455
Linda HoinvilleSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Kate Granger Building, Priestley Road, Surrey Research Park, GU2 7YH, Guildford, UK.
Dawn QuerstretDepartment of Psychology and Pedagogic Science, Faculty of Sport, Health and Applied Science, St Mary's University, Waldegrave Road, Twickenham, TW1 4SX, London, UK.
Cath TaylorSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Kate Granger Building, Priestley Road, Surrey Research Park, GU2 7YH, Guildford, UK.
Magdalena ZasadaSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Kate Granger Building, Priestley Road, Surrey Research Park, GU2 7YH, Guildford, UK.
Ruth AbramsSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Kate Granger Building, Priestley Road, Surrey Research Park, GU2 7YH, Guildford, UK.
University of Surrey · GBSt Mary's University Twickenham London · GB

Funding

The Health and Care Professionals Council (HCPC) The Health and Care Professionals Council (HCPC)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is the responsibility of healthcare regulators to ensure healthcare professionals remain fit for practice in healthcare settings. If there are concerns about an individual healthcare professional they may undergo a fitness to practice investigation. This process is known to be hugely stressful for doctors and social workers, but little is known about the impact of this experience on other professions. This study explores the experiences of registrants going through the process of being reported to the UK's Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) and attending fitness to practice (FTP) hearings. We discuss the implications of this process on registrants' wellbeing and, from our findings, present recommendations based on registrants experiences. In doing so we articulate the structural processes of the HCPC FTP process and the impact this has on individuals.

methodsThis study uses semi-structured interviews and framework analysis to explore the experiences of 15 registrants who had completed the FTP process. Participants were sampled for maximum variation and were selected to reflect the range of possible processes and outcomes through the FTP process.

resultsThe psychological impact of undergoing a FTP process was significant for the majority of participants. Their stories described influences on their wellbeing at both a macro (institutional/organisational) and micro (individual) level. A lack of information, long length of time for the process and poor support avenues were macro factors impacting on the ability of registrants to cope with their experiences (theme 1). These macro factors led to feelings of powerlessness, vulnerability and threat of ruin for many registrants (theme 2). Suggested improvements (theme 3) included better psychological support (e.g. signposting or provision); proportional processes to the incident (e.g. mediation instead of hearings); and taking context into account.

conclusionsFindings suggest that improvements to both the structure and conduct of the FTP process are warranted. Implementation of better signposting for support both during and after a FTP process may improve psychological wellbeing. There may also be value in considering alternative ways of organising the FTP process to enable greater consideration of and flexibility for registrants' context and how they are investigated.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelPhysiciansDelivery of Health CareExerciseHumansUnited KingdomEmotional impactFitness to practiceHealthcare professionalsStaff well-being

Identifiers

PMID34412640
PMCPMC8375211
OpenAlexW3195852477

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.