RESUMO
Established under New Zealand's Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 in 2014, the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal (HPDT) hears and determines charges in relation to 21 health professions. Using publically available information, an exploratory descriptive analysis was conducted of 288 published HPDT decisions between 2004 and 2014 to assess the procedural factors (practitioner and hearing characteristics) and outcome factors (findings, penalties and appeals) relevant to these decisions. In particular, the study compared the two health practitioner groups (medical practitioners and nurses) with the highest number of decisions. The study found that nurses were significantly less likely to have legal representation or to lodge an appeal than medical practitioners, with nurses also more likely not to attend the hearing, have their registration cancelled and not receive permanent suppression. The study also revealed important characteristics of the decisions that are not contained in the summaries available on the HPDT website. These characteristics provide opportunities for future comparison across and within occupational groups. While relevant to health practitioners, lawyers, professional bodies, employers, educators and policy-makers, the findings also contribute to the international scholarship on professional discipline and tribunal decision-making.