Avant Insurance

Complaints process AHPRA's response embossed upon it – I thought my career was at an end. Thank you for ruining my day – please never write to me again." While this anecdote may be apocryphal, it does encapsulate some of the challenges for the Medical Board of Australia and AHPRA in trying to improve the way it interacts with doctors. Dealing with notifications about the conduct, health or performance of doctors is one of the most important roles for the Board and AHPRA. Our central focus is on protecting patients, not doctors. Quite rightly, there is intense interest in how well we do this and how the process could be improved. A recent article in Connect explored the complaints process, highlighting the experiences of some doctors who have been the subject of a complaint and looking at doctors' mandatory reporting obligations. Being "before your Board" can be a very confronting and stressful experience for a doctor. This has led us to ask both practitioners and notifiers what is important to them in their interaction with the Board and AHPRA. We also work with the AMA and MDOs, including Avant, to identify areas for improvement. Our work has told us that doctors value a timely response; being treated fairly; receiving clear information about the process and what to expect; knowing there will be relevant clinical input into the consideration of the complaint; having a clear contact point within AHPRA; being kept up to date as their matter progresses, and being advised of the Board's decisions and reasons. This feedback has helped us develop an action plan to improve the practitioner and notifier experience across three main areas of focus: ▸ Reducing the length of time it takes for us to assess a complaint – we aim to close matters that don't need investigation or regulatory action as soon as possible. Around 40% of complaints dealt with by the Board and AHPRA are closed within three months. Of these, more than two-thirds are closed following initial assessment without the need for further investigation, either because the practitioner has taken steps to address the concern or the legal threshold for action has not been met. ▸ Revamping our written communication to make it less legalistic and easier to understand – our letters are now more helpful in tone, explain the complaints In the last issue of Connect we discussed our efforts to ensure fairness in the complaints process and how we advocate for our members' interests to regulators. The Medical Board of Australia and AHPRA asked to put forward their perspective in the following article. process in more detail, and outline what to expect if you are the subject of a complaint. In March, we also updated our guide for practitioners which outlines what to expect if a complaint is made. And we continue to make changes to improve the information on our website. ▸ Reducing the time it takes us to investigate notifications – this continues to be a challenge. Currently we complete around 62% of investigations within 12 months but we would like to do better. Strategies to achieve this include ensuring the scope of investigation is clear, seeking appropriate clinical opinions without delay, and working with Medicare and other agencies to get quicker access to information and data that we routinely require. AHPRA is receiving an increasing volume of notifications, as is the case in many countries. Managing complaints more efficiently is, therefore, both an operational imperative and a response to legitimate community and practitioner expectations. We will continue to publish more data about our performance and welcome informed debate and feedback on ways we can do better. Thank you for ruining my day – please never write to me again. Martin Fletcher with Dr Joanna Flynn AM at the recent International Conference on Medical Regulation (IAMRA). Georgie Haysom BSc, LLM, LLB Head of Advocacy Connect | Issue 07 | avant.org.au/publications 23 23 Dr Joanna Flynn, AM Chair, Medical Board of Australia Martin Fletcher Chief Executive Officer, AHPRA I t is said that a past president of the UK General Medical Council, anxious to win favour with the medical profession, decided to send congratulatory letters out whenever a physician won a prestigious award. That year a British doctor won the Nobel Prize for science but the response from the great man was disappointing. "Dear President," he wrote, "this morning I was looking forward to the day ahead when I came down to breakfast to be confronted by an envelope propped up against the cereal packet with the dreaded letters 'GMC'

• Cover