Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39953438›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2025

Engagement of health and social care employers in professional regulatory fitness to practise - missed regulatory and organisational opportunities?

Louise M Wallace, Mari Greenfield

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Louise M WallaceFaculty of Wellbeing, Education and Language Studies, Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, UK. louise.wallace@open.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3770-0580
Mari GreenfieldFaculty of Wellbeing, Education and Language Studies, Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, UK. mari.greenfield@open.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3594-0399

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research 131322
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth and social care professional regulators are organisations that ensure their registrants have the correct qualifications and experience to practise in their profession. There are 13 statutory regulators in the United Kingdom (UK) and 29 voluntary accredited registers. Referrals of serious concerns about registrants' Fitness to Practise (FtP) are investigated by regulators, and can lead to a public hearing. Employers may refer their employee to the regulator, and provide evidence about the concerns about their practice. Communication between the regulator and employer is central to ensure fitness to practise procedures are timely and effective, contributing to patient safety and to the improvement of health and social care professional and organisational practices.

methodsIn this mixed-methods research, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 participants who held senior management roles in health and social care organisations in the UK and were responsible for communicating with professional regulators. Descriptive statistics were produced relating to participants' roles and organisations, and qualitative data was analysed using Template Analysis methodology.

resultsFour themes relating to communication between employers and regulators were identified: Process of regulatory investigation, Point of contact with employers, Local level/informal resolutions, and Organisational learning. Employers frequently described the processes as protracted and stressful for all concerned, and communication with regulators as sporadic and unidirectional during investigations. This style of communication hampered organisational learning from Fitness to Practise cases. Regulators' employer liaison officers, where they existed, improved communications.

conclusionsFitness to Practise processes create the opportunities for not only the determination of whether an individual professional is fit to practise and the supportive measures that might need to be taken if they continue to practice, but also for health and social care organisations to prevent occurrence and re-occurrence of misconduct, thereby improving their services. Regulators' communication patterns resulted in these employers' organisational opportunities being missed. It may also lead to over-referral thereby leading to burden on employers, registrants and regulators. Improvements in communication by regulators such as via dedicated employer liaison functions could help organisations access these opportunities as well as promote the objectives of regulators to uphold trust in regulation.

Indexed as

Social WorkCommunicationFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative ResearchUnited KingdomCommunicationEmployersFitness to PractiseLiaisonMisconductProfessionalsRegulation

Identifiers

PMID39953438
PMCPMC11829395

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.