Disciplinary processes for nurses, from organizational supervision to outcomes: A document analysis of a regulatory authority's decisions.

AIM: This study aims to explore the disciplinary processes for nurses, from organizational supervision to final decisions by the Finnish regulatory authority. BACKGROUND: Regulatory authorities are responsible for protecting the public, by ensuring that they receive safe, competent and ethical nursing care, but little is known about the disciplinary processes for nurses. METHODS: This is a retrospective document analysis of 296 disciplinary decisions by the Finnish regulatory authority from 2007 to 2016. The data were analysed using a quantitative design with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We studied 204 disciplined nurses (81.4% female) with a mean age of 43.5 years. The disciplinary process comprised organizational supervision, complaints, investigations and decisions. Nurses with substance abuse issues were more likely to face criminal investigations and receive temporary decisions. The process lasted from under 1 month to years and could have profound effects on nurses, colleagues and nurse managers and compromise patient safety. CONCLUSION: This study identified key factors that could inform the disciplinary processes for nurses. More knowledge is needed about how organisations ensure patient safety when unprofessional conduct is suspected. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Retaining nursing professionals is vital due to global shortages, and more attention should be paid to organizational supervision and support for nurses during disciplinary processes.

Is Academic Attainment or Situational Judgment Test Performance in Medical School Associated With the Likelihood of Disciplinary Action? A National Retrospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Disciplinary action imposed on physicians indicates their fitness to practice medicine is impaired and patient safety is potentially at risk. This national retrospective cohort study sought to examine whether there was an association between academic attainment or performance on a situational judgment test (SJT) in medical school and the risk of receiving disciplinary action within the first 5 years of professional practice in the United Kingdom. METHOD: The authors included data from the UK Medical Education Database for 34,865 physicians from 33 U.K. medical schools that started the UK Foundation Programme (similar to internship) between 2014 and 2018. They analyzed data from 2 undergraduate medical assessments used in the United Kingdom: the Educational Performance Measure (EPM), which is based on academic attainment, and SJT, which is an assessment of professional attributes. The authors calculated hazard ratios (HRs) for EPM and SJT scores. RESULTS: The overall rate of disciplinary action was low (65/34,865, 0.19%) and the mean time to discipline was 810 days (standard deviation [SD] = 440). None of the physicians with fitness to practice concerns identified as students went on to receive disciplinary action after they qualified as physicians. The multivariate survival analysis demonstrated that a score increase of 1 SD (approximately 7.6 percentage points) on the EPM reduced the hazard of disciplinary action by approximately 50% (HR = 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38, 0.69; P < .001). There was not a statistically significant association between the SJT score and the hazard of disciplinary action (HR = 0.84; 95% CI: 0.62, 1.13; P = .24). CONCLUSIONS: An increase in EPM score was significantly associated with a reduced hazard of disciplinary action, whereas performance on the SJT was not. Early identification of increased risk of disciplinary action may provide an opportunity for remediation and avoidance of patient harm.

Multiple United States Medical Licensing Examination Attempts and the Estimated Risk of Disciplinary Actions Among Graduates of U.S. and Canadian Medical Schools.

PURPOSE: The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) recently announced 2 policy changes: shifting from numeric score reporting on the Step 1 examination to pass/fail reporting and limiting examinees to 4 attempts for each Step component. In light of these policies, exam measures other than scores, such as the number of examination attempts, are of interest. Attempt limit policies are intended to ensure minimum standards of physician competency, yet little research has explored how Step attempts relate to physician practice outcomes. This study examined the relationship between USMLE attempts and the likelihood of receiving disciplinary actions from state medical boards. METHOD: The sample population was 219,018 graduates from U.S. and Canadian MD-granting medical schools who passed all USMLE Step examinations by 2011 and obtained a medical license in the United States, using data from the NBME and the Federation of State Medical Boards. Logistic regressions estimated how attempts on Steps 1, 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK), and 3 examinations influenced the likelihood of receiving disciplinary actions by 2018, while accounting for physician characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 3,399 physicians (2%) received at least 1 disciplinary action. Additional attempts needed to pass Steps 1, 2 CK, and 3 were associated with an increased likelihood of receiving disciplinary actions (odds ratio [OR]: 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01, 1.13; OR: 1.09, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.16; OR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.17, respectively), after accounting for other factors. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians who took multiple attempts to pass Steps 1, 2 CK, and 3 were associated with higher estimated likelihood of receiving disciplinary actions. This study offers support for licensure and practice standards to account for physicians' USMLE attempts. The relatively small effect sizes, however, caution policy makers from placing sole emphasis on this relationship.

[Dutch medical disciplinary law cases concerning psychiatry, 2015-2019]. / Uitspraken van regionale tuchtcolleges in zaken betreffende de psychiatrie, 2015-2019.

BACKGROUND: The aim of medical disciplinary law (as part of the Dutch law 'Wet BIG') is to safeguard the quality of professional practice in the health services. Quantitative data about Dutch medical disciplinary law is sparse: little is known about the nature, quantity and the verdicts of disciplinary law complaints against psychiatrists and residents. AIM: Gaining insight in Dutch medical disciplinary law, in particular with regard to number and nature of disciplinary law complaints against psychiatrists(-psychotherapist) and psychiatry residents. METHOD: Descriptive retrospective study. We examined all medical disciplinary law cases against psychiatrists(-psychotherapist) and psychiatry residents in the period 2015-2019. RESULTS: In the study period the regional medical disciplinary courts handled 353 cases against psychiatrists(-psychotherapist) and residents psychiatry, on average 70.6 per year. 321 of these cases were against psychiatrists and 32 against residents. Complaint density was 1.74 for psychiatrists and 0.37 for residents. Subject of most cases was 'wrong diagnosis', followed by 'wrong therapeutic plan' and 'incorrect communication'. The number of cases resulting in a disciplinary measure was on average 31%: warning (49%), reprimand (30%), (conditional) suspension (15%). In 17 cases the professional was (partially) denied to practice. CONCLUSIONS Within Dutch psychiatry little attention is paid to disciplinary law, despite the fact that psychiatrists are relatively often confronted with disciplinary law complaints. The current explorative analysis underlines the need for further research, especially on the difference between male/female psychiatrists and an international comparison with respect to complaints about (sexual) misconduct.

The Current State of Opioid Prescribing and Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) Action Against Physicians: An Analysis of DEA Database 2004-2017.

BACKGROUND: Prescribing opioids has become a challenge. The US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have become more involved, culminating in the March 2016 release of the CDC's "Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain." OBJECTIVES: Given the new guidelines, we wanted to see if there have been any changes in the numbers, demographics, physician risk factors, charges, and sanctions involving the DEA against physicians who prescribe opioids, when compared to a previous DEA database review from 1998 to 2006. STUDY DESIGN: This study involved an analysis of the DEA database from 2004 to 2017. SETTING: The review was conducted at the Henry Ford Health System Division of Pain Medicine. METHOD: After institutional review board approval at Henry Ford Health System, an analysis of the DEA database of criminal prosecutions of physician registrants from 2004-2017 was performed. The database was reviewed for demographic information such as age, gender, type of degree (doctor of medicine [MD] or doctor of osteopathic medicine [DO]), years of practice, state, charges, and outcome of prosecution (probation, sentencing, and length of sentencing). An internet-based search was performed on each registrant to obtain demographic data on specialty, years of practice, type of medical school (US vs foreign), board certification, and type of employment (private vs employed). RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2017, Pain Medicine (PM) had the highest percentage of in-specialty action at 0.11% (n = 5). There was an average of 18 prosecutions per year vs 14 in the previous review. Demographic risk factors for prosecution demonstrated the significance of the type of degree (MD vs. DO), gender, type of employment (private vs. employed), and board certification status for rates of prosecution. Having a DO degree and being male were associated with significantly higher risk as well as being in private practice and not having board certification (P < .001). In terms of type of criminal charges as a percent of cases, possession with intent to distribute (n = 90) was most prevalent, representing 52.3% of charges, with new charges being prescribing without medical purpose outside the usual course of practice (n = 71) representing 41.3% of charges. Comparison of US graduates (MD/DO) vs. foreign graduates showed higher rates of DEA action for foreign graduates but this was of borderline significance (P = .072). LIMITATIONS: State-by-state comparisons could not be made. Specialty type was sometimes self-reported, and information on all opioid prosecutions could not be obtained. The previous study by Goldenbaum et al included data beyond DEA prosecution, so direct comparisons may be limited. CONCLUSION: The overall risk of DEA action as a percentage of total physicians is small but not insignificant. The overall rates of DEA prosecution have increased. New risk factors include type of degree (DO vs. MD) and being in private practice with a subtle trend toward foreign graduates at higher risk. With the trend toward less prescribing by previously high-risk specialties such as Family Medicine, there has been an increase in the relative risk of DEA action for specialties treating patients with pain such as PM, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, neurology, and neurosurgery bearing the brunt of prosecutions. New, more subtle charges have been added involving interpretation of the medical purpose of opioids and standard of care for their use. KEY WORDS: Certification, CDC, criminal, DEA, opioid, prescribing, prosecution, sanctions.

Is Covid-19 sowing the seeds for future litigation?

We consider various types of litigation that may follow the Covid-19 pandemic, including: claims against National Health Service (NHS) Trusts by patients who have contracted the coronavirus (or by their bereaved families), claims by NHS staff against their employer for a failure to provide any or adequate personal protective equipment or testing, commercial claims arising from the procurement of medical supplies, the potential liabilities to those who suffer adverse reactions to any vaccine and the guidance issued by the regulators in relation to subsequent disciplinary action.

Review of Rhode Island Physician Loss-of-Licensure Cases, 2009-2019.

Disciplinary actions against physicians are uncommon, and loss of license is less common. This unmatched, case-control, and descriptive study reviews disciplinary actions involving physician loss-of-license cases from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2019. There were 82 physician loss-of-license cases involving 66 physicians, which were categorized by age, sex, and specialty and were compared to 4,347 non-disciplined controls. In this study, males (OR 4.69, p<0.001) were associated with an increased risk of loss of license; age was a separate risk factor (OR 1.24, p<0.05). Preventive strategies are discussed to reduce future physician loss of license.

Hypervisible Nurses: Effects of Circulating Ignorance and Knowledge on Acts of Whistleblowing in Health.

Whistleblowing has been examined from various angles over the past 40 years, but not yet as a matter of epistemology. Whistleblowing can be understood as resulting from the improper transmission of critical knowledge in an organization (eg, knowledge about poor care or wrongdoing). Using the sociology of ignorance, we wish to rethink whistleblowing and the failures it brings to light. This article examines how nurses get caught in the strategic circulation of knowledge and ignorance, which can culminate in acts of whistleblowing. The sociology of ignorance helps understand how whistleblowing is borne out of the complex and strategic circulation of knowledge and ignorance that spells multiple and intersecting epistemic positions for nurses. In particular, various organizational blind spots position nurses as untrustworthy and illegitimate speakers in the "business" of the organization. Organizational failings therefore remain concealed while nurses become hypervisible, both as faulty care providers and as problematic information brokers.

A descriptive study of the effect of a disciplinary proceeding decision on medical practitioners' practice behaviour in the context of providing a hydrocortisone and lignocaine injection.

INTRODUCTION: We conducted a descriptive study to evaluate any changes in practice behaviour regarding the provision of hydrocortisone and lignocaine (H&L) injections among doctors and how an H&L injection is priced following a disciplinary proceeding decision. A doctor had been fined SGD 100,000 for failing to obtain informed consent before an H&L injection. METHODS: We performed a survey shortly after the disciplinary decision to ascertain: (a) the category of the respondent; (b) whether the respondent provided H&L injections and how much he charged before the decision; and (c) after the decision. All members of the Singapore Medical Association and College of Family Physicians Singapore are doctors and were invited to participate. RESULTS: 1,927 doctors responded to the survey. Prior to the decision, 804 doctors did not perform H&L injections; this increased by 20.4% to 968 after the decision. The number of doctors who gave H&L injections decreased by 164 (14.6%), from the previous 1,123. Pre-decision, doctors who determined their own price for H&L injections charged a median pricing ≤ SGD 100. Post-decision, the median charge rose to > SGD 100 to SGD 200. At higher price bands, the number of doctors who charged > SGD 1,000 increased eight-fold, from eight to 65. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated how a disciplinary decision can affect practice behaviour, and specifically how doctors may choose to not offer a service, an example of defensive medicine through avoidance behaviour. It also showed how prices for a service can rise following such a decision, which demonstrates the concept of negative general deterrence in sentencing.

Experiences and outcomes of nurses referred to a peer health assistance program: Recommendations for nursing management.

AIM: To provide recommendations for nursing management based on the experiences of current and former nurses who were served by a peer health assistance program (PHAP). BACKGROUND: Providing help for nurses with impaired practice is critical to their health and well-being, assuring patient safety and public trust, as well as returning competent nurses to the healthcare workforce. METHODS: Nurses (n = 268) who were current clients or former clients of a PHAP were surveyed about their experiences. RESULTS: Nearly half of nurses were referred by the board of nursing with 69% reporting the referral was due to substance use, alcohol being the most common. Most (62%) did not believe that their substance use affected their practice yet relayed that recognition of their emotional or physical condition could have led to earlier identification. Key barriers to seeking assistance were fear and embarrassment, along with concerns about losing their nursing license. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses in management are in key roles to identify and intervene with nurses who are at risk for impaired practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Nurses in management and nurse colleagues would benefit from workplace education on the warning signs of impaired nursing practice and how to address it.

Association of Participation in the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Maintenance of Certification Program and Physician Disciplinary Actions.

OBJECTIVE: The study analyzed the relationship between participation in the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation maintenance of certification program and the incidence of disciplinary actions by state medical boards over a physician's career. The hypothesis is that physicians who do not maintain their board certification have a higher likelihood of state medical board disciplinary actions. DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study analyzed American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation maintenance of certification data from all board-certified physiatrists who were enrolled in the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation maintenance of certification program from 1993 to 2007. RESULTS: Matching examination and license data were available for 4794 physicians, who received a total of 212 disciplinary action reports through the Federation of State Medical Boards. The results showed that physicians who have a lapse in completing the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation maintenance of certification program have a 2.5-fold higher incidence of receiving a disciplinary action report through the Federation of State Medical Boards (95% confidence interval = 1.76-3.63) and had higher severity violations (χ = 7.14, P < 0.05) than physicians whose certificate never lapsed. CONCLUSIONS: For physicians in physical medicine and rehabilitation, loss of board certification through failure to fulfill the maintenance of certification program requirements is associated with an increased risk of disciplinary action from a state medical licensing board.

Understanding Client Vulnerability in the Disciplining of Legal Professionals in New South Wales.

Despite the increasing use of "vulnerability" in policy and legal documents, and the emerging scholarly literature about vulnerability and the law, there is little research focused on vulnerability from clients' perspectives. To address this gap, we analysed the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) and appellate court cases involving vulnerable clients and disciplined lawyers in NSW from 1 January 2011 to 30 January 2019. Our analysis of the cases draws from the "vulnerability theory" literature. We identified the following characteristics of clients for analysis: older age, gender, health impairment, and immigrant status. Twenty-eight tribunal cases and two appellate court cases involved vulnerable clients. Overall, the cases revealed that the relationship between public protection and vulnerability is not expressly discussed by NCAT. To optimise the legislative intent to safeguard the public, the NSW legislation should explicitly include vulnerability as a relevant feature of the disciplinary regime.

The Association Between Maintaining American Board of Emergency Medicine Certification and State Medical Board Disciplinary Actions.

BACKGROUND: In certain medical specialties, board certification is associated with a lower risk of state medical board disciplinary actions. OBJECTIVE: The association between maintaining American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) certification and state medical disciplinary actions had not been studied. This study was undertaken to determine if maintaining ABEM certification was associated with a lower risk of disciplinary action. METHODS: This investigation was a historical cohort study using Cox regression. Physicians who did not have a lapse in ABEM certification were compared with physicians who had a lapse to determine the risk of disciplinary action. Lapsing was determined at the expiration of the initial certificate. This study included all physicians who obtained initial ABEM certification from 1980-2005. Additional covariates of interest included the number of attempts on the ABEM Qualifying Examination (1 vs. >1), the geographic region of the physician's residence, and the country of medical school. RESULTS: There were 23,002 physicians in the study cohort. Of these, 3370 (14.7%) let their certification lapse after initial certification. There were 701 (3.0%) physicians with disciplinary events. Lapsed physicians had higher rates of disciplinary actions than physicians who did not lapse (6.4% vs. 2.5%). ABEM-certified physicians who did not lapse were significantly less likely to be disciplined as physicians who let their certificate lapse (hazard ratio 0.50 [95% confidence interval 0.42-0.59]). CONCLUSIONS: The absolute incidence of physicians with a disciplinary action in this study cohort was low (3.0%). Maintaining ABEM certification was associated with a lower risk of state medical board disciplinary actions.

The relevance of nurses and midwives code of conduct in Australia.

AIM: This study explores Australian clinical nurses' and midwives' familiarity with a new code of conduct and understanding in what ways the code is important for nurses as they carry out clinical practice. BACKGROUND: Codes specify the expectations of nurses' responsibilities, legal requirements, behaviour and conduct. Being familiar with the code is central to being a professional nurse or midwife. As nursing continues to advance, updating the code is crucial to maintain professional and safe practice. DESIGN: This project utilized a cross-sectional descriptive design. METHODS: A survey was developed incorporating Likert-type scale assessments of the 7 value statements from the 2018 Australian Nurses' Code of Conduct for familiarity and importance. The survey included open-ended questions to elicit clinical nurses' experiences of conduct breaches, opinions regarding usefulness and relevance of the code for current practice. Data were collected at an acute care hospital in Sydney during January 2018. RESULTS: Significant differences relating to cultural and patient-centred approaches were revealed in the study. The new value involving the role of research was least understood and ranked least important by nurses and midwives. Professional 'integrity' resonated with participants when considering the behaviour of nurses, and short, unambiguous values were the most popular. Additionally, a substantial number of participants had no knowledge of the code or were not aware of the recently revised version. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: A code of conduct provides structure and guidance for workplace values and principles. A respected code is important to the nursing profession to help prevent inappropriate and incompetent behaviour and as a guide for nursing performance. Nurses in this study claimed the code was highly relevant to their work as a nurse and was incorporated into their daily practice.

A duty of care to the nurse as well.

Sam Foster, Chief Nurse, Oxford University Hospitals, reflects on the responsibility employers have to ensure that disciplinary procedures and processes are fit for purpose.