HPC consultation on standards of proficiency: AfPP Response

Released on - 02/11/2007

AfPP consider that overall the introduction to the document provides an informative explanation to the role and purpose of both the generic and profession specific standards. We would specifically wish to draw attention to the section headed ‘Your scope of practice’, which is considered to be both very informative and relevant. However, whilst accepting that career progression may hinder the ability to meet all of the standards, AfPP would wish to seek assurance as to how the Health Professions Council (HPC) will be informed and monitor the standards that are not met by an individual registrant. It is accepted that the personal judgment of the individual practitioner is the mechanism by which would be utilised if extra training or experience is required. However, AfPP seek assurance that the HPC will have a mechanism for assessing the appropriateness of an individual’s judgment in order to ensure patient safety and professional integrity.

 

AfPP would also seek clarification as to how the HPC will assess if an individual registrant has met the required standards and if the HPC has provided guidance on this issue, AfPP would welcome information on this process that is particular to ODP’s

 

In relation to the Generic Standards of the document, AfPP again consider these to be both informative and relevant overall. However, there are some specific points which it is suggested may require further clarification and these are as follows:

1a.2     AfPP seek clarification of the term non-oppressive in this statement and its particular interpretation in relation to the profession of ODP’s

 

1b.3 In relation to the requirement to assess a registrant’s ability to communicate in English to the required standard, AfPP seek assurance in relation to the assessment process. In addition, AfPP seek information relating to who has the responsibility for such assessment and also, how the HPC will be informed of this assessment in relation to ensuring that it has been met.

 

With reference to the need for registrants to acknowledge the need for a service users need for an interpreter if English is not their first language, AfPP would suggest that the need to document the use of an interpreter in the service user’s record should also be incorporated into this element of the standard. Again with reference to the role of an ODP, AfPP would consider the use of an interpreter to be an important element of care that should be recorded. In addition, the use of an interpreter should be within the recommendation of local protocols and guidance.

 

2b.3 AfPP notes the change in text from ‘different client groups’ to ‘different groups’ but would suggest that the use of the phrase service users would be more consistent in relation to the document as a whole.

 

2b.5 AfPP are aware that some abbreviations can have more than one meaning which is dependant on the context in which it is used and therefore are of the opinion that abbreviations are not necessarily appropriate in a service user’s record in order that confusion may be avoided. For example the abbreviation ESR can be interpreted as Electronic Staff Record or Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate, terms that cannot be considered to be similar.

 

AfPP would also suggest that a statement of the HPC’s requirements in relation to delegation of duties may also be appropriate to the generic standards. With specific reference to an ODP, delegation of activities is often a frequent occurrence, and whilst it is accepted that it is within the remit of the Standards of conduct performance and ethics, published by the HPC for all professions, AfPP would suggest that it may be relevant to the generic standards applicable to registration in addition to the standards of conduct performance and ethics.

 

In relation to the existing Standards of Proficiency for Operating Department Practice, AfPP consider that the existing document is robust. AfPP acknowledge that the HPC can be assured that these standards have been met at the point of registration but wish to seek further information on how it will be assessed that a registrant has maintained practice to these standards at the point of registration.