Posts Tagged ‘Overseas doctors’

UK must be enabled to test European doctors

The Guardian - 11th April 2010 12:20 pm

The next government must “as a matter of extreme urgency” demand changes to a 2005 EU directive governing the free movement of labour in an effort to prevent more deaths at the hands of incompetent foreign GPs, senior MPs claimed. 

New ministers should also promise to change UK laws which “goldplated” European rules and prevented medical regulators giving language tests to European doctors, according to a critical report on out-of-hours services by the Commons health select committee.

The report criticised NHS bodies for failing to use other vetting powers, noting that no disciplinary action had been taken against an NHS body that did not check the English language skills of Daniel Ubani, a German doctor who unlawfully killed a patient on his first shift in Britain.

The challenge to begin changing the structure for vetting EU doctors before a long-planned Brussels review in 2012 could mean an early clash with EU partners for the new administration.

At present, EU doctors can join the GMC’s register without undergoing the language and competence tests faced by other doctors from abroad, as long as their own countries’ regulators vouch for their credentials.

The Department of Health in England has already ordered that the NHS implement properly its existing system for safeguarding patients following a damning coroner’s verdict on the case of 70-year-old David Gray, who was accidentally given a massive overdose of a painkilling drug by Ubani in 2008.

Read more at The Guardian.

GMC wants new powers to test European docs

By Mike Broad - 19th March 2010 4:49 pm

The GMC has once again called for an urgent change in the law to enable them to test the language skills and competency of European doctors before they start work in the UK.

In presenting evidence to the health select committee, GMC chief executive Niall Dickson said the regulator needed more powers to be able to properly check the competence of European doctors.

Dickson said: “What we can do is check who they are; we can get from the competent European authority a certificate saying they are somebody of good standing, and thirdly we get the qualifications they produce.

“What we cannot do is look behind those things. We cannot say well that qualification doesn’t mean very much. If it is approved, and it is on the European list, then we simply have to accept them and in the case of Dr Ubani that was of course what happened.”

German doctor Dr David Ubani negligently killed a patient during an out-of-ours visit in Cambridgeshire in 2008. David Gray died after being administered 10 times the normal dose of diamorphine. The coroner, and a subsequent inquiry, raised serious concerns about the management of out-of-hours care.

Health minister Mike O’Brien, who also appeared in front of the committee, questioned whether empowering the GMC was the best way to tackle the problem.

He suggested that greater adherence to existing responsibilities, and better management of the ‘performers list’, by trusts and employers could be the solution.

O’Brien said: “I am making absolutely clear that PCTs should have been by law, since 2004, looking at language skills. They had no discretion on this; it was a legal obligation. They should be doing it now.”

He added: “The most important check, and where we have to tighten up a lot, is on the employer because the employer, either a co-operative or a private company, needs to ensure that the competence in terms of the skill and also the language skills are adequate to do GP services.”

Dr Ubani was employed as a locum GP covering an out-of-hours shift by private sector provider Take Care Now, which recruited him at short notice from Germany.

O’Brien felt that that working with PCTs and employers would be more expedient than changing the law. “If we go into a long drawn-out discussion about changing EU Directives, what the GMC want and giving them new powers…I think it will just take longer, but I want to sort this out by the end of this year,” he said.

Our GPs must prevent out-of-hours “killings”

By Mike Broad - 4th February 2010 6:20 pm

Apologies over the unnecessary death of David Gray have filled the front pages and airwaves this week.

He was given a fatal overdose by Dr Daniel Ubani, a German doctor flown in to provide out-of-hours GP cover in Cambridgeshire, and a coroner ruled this week that his death amounted to gross negligence and manslaughter.

The coroner William Morris issued 11 recommendations to the Department of Health to improve out-of-hours GP services.

The main one, and most people’s biggest bone of contention, is the need for a review of how EU agreements work in the UK. Morris said the government must issue guidance to all NHS trusts over checking doctors’ English, their experience of the NHS and how they acquired their GP status.

However, as the GMC is at pains to point out, they’re not allowed to test doctors from the EU. The combination of EU law and domestic legislation (the Medical Act 1983) excludes the testing of a European applicant’s language proficiency or their competence.

This is a bit of a problem when you consider that Ubani was flown in at the eleventh hour, started work immediately with no induction and was utterly incompetent. (Makes you also wonder why we booted out loads of good doctors with excellent English from the sub-continent a couple of years ago).

Without wanting to come over all UKIP, our health secretary needs to grow a spine and put our relationship with Europe on a proper footing on this issue.

Morris also demanded “robust” clinical and management measures, including training and induction for non-UK doctors, and said only the company actually running the out-of-hours GP services should recruit doctors in future. It follows the Care Quality Commission making similar demands of trusts last year.

And this is where we get to the crux of it. Of course all overseas doctors coming into the UK should be tested and we should have a clear idea of the equivalence of their training. But, the real problem is how we’ve organised our out-of-hours GP services. Crap European doctors shouldn’t be required.

This week’s apology by NHS Cambridgeshire, which employed Take Care Now to provide the services in question, is revealing.

Dr Paul Zollinger-Read, chief executive of NHS Cambridgeshire, said: “We as an organisation still have much to learn from this case. Our monitoring of contracts has already improved significantly, but we must not become complacent.

“Systems around the registering of GPs by the GMC and on Performers’ Lists need to reviewed, and the recruitment, checking and vetting of GPs by our providers is vital if we are all to prevent this happening again.”

He’s got responsibility but seemingly limited power to control events. It doesn’t take much to go wrong, in a safety critical environment, where organisations are contracting and sub-contracting to the private sector, to lose sight of the process.

The reasons why Ubani was used remain. He was cheap and available (he even paid for his own flight and accommodation). It had nothing to do with quality. More checks will help but, in our new age of austerity, PCTs are still going to be looking for cheap deals.

I think it speaks volumes that Take Care Now is still in business, regardless of whether it has improved. It lost its Cambridgeshire contract, but still provides services for two other trusts: NHS Worcestershire and NHS Great Yarmouth and Waveney.

The GP contract has been an unmitigated disaster for out-of-hours care in the community. It’s time to bring local GP practices back into the equation and if that means the GP contract has to be re-negotiated, then so be it.  

German doctor unlawfully killed overdose patient

The Guardian - 12:18 pm

A patient who was given a fatal overdose by an out-of-hours doctor was unlawfully killed and his death amounted to gross negligence and manslaughter, a coroner has ruled.

Dr Daniel Ubani was “incompetent and not of an acceptable standard”, the coroner said.

David Gray, 70, died after the German locum administered a fatal dose of a painkiller when he was working on his first shift for an out-of-hours GP service provider.

The comments were made by the Cambridgeshire and North-east coroner, William Morris, sitting in Wisbech, at the end of an inquest that has highlighted the concerns about the quality of out-of-hours care offered to patients.

Morris said “weaknesses remain in the system” and made 11 recommendations to the Department of Health for a review of the entire service.

In August, the GMC and the Royal College of GPs demanded a rewriting of EU rules that allow doctors from Europe to be registered in the UK without tests on their English or medical competence. Doctors from the rest of the world already face such checks.

Read more at The Guardian.

Lib Dems call for test to root out poor EU doctors

BBC Health - 27th January 2010 9:51 am

The Liberal Democrats have called for doctors from other European Union countries working in the UK to be subject to tougher restrictions.

The party has called for exams to root out those with poor language skills and inferior medical training.

It follows the case of an out-of-hours GP from Germany who accidentally gave a patient a fatal overdose.

The Department of Health said primary care trusts were already legally bound to provide safe, high quality care.

Lib Dem health spokesman Norman Lamb said: “I believe patients lives are at risk because standards across Europe are not uniformly good and because doctors can come into this country and practise in the NHS without a test of competence and language.”

Mr Lamb’s party will also press in the Commons for a new criminal offence under which hospital managers could face prosecution if they fail to carry out such tests.

There are almost 20,000 doctors from the EU qualified to work in the UK.

Read more at BBC Health.

European doctors could face quality check in UK

By Mike Broad - 19th January 2010 4:24 pm

A major review of the regulation of doctors’ education and training has taken the first steps in controlling the quality of European doctors entering the UK.

The review’s draft report makes 27 recommendations to the GMC a head of it taking over the regulation of the whole of medical education in April, following its merger with the Post Graduate Medical Education and Training Board.

The report challenges the automatic inclusion of senior European doctors, with supposedly equivalent qualifications, on the specialist register.

Member states of the European Economic Area are required by law to recognise the qualifications of each others’ doctors. It means that the GMC cannot carry out additional assessments of knowledge and skill.

This clearly limits the effectiveness of the registers and the ability of the GMC to protect patients,’ the report says.

It proposes that European specialists and GPs should only be eligible for inclusion on the medical registers ‘at the point of first revalidation following completion of training’. This would require the GMC to uncouple the completion of specialist and GP training from the decision to allow a doctor onto the specialist or GP register.

The move, it says, ‘could provide a mechanism for continuing to meet EC requirements in relation to recognition of training while ensuring greater equivalence in standards at the point of entry to the specialist and GP registers’.

Last year, consultant anaesthetist John Hutchinson campaigned for greater monitoring of European locums, while last week an inquiry started into the circumstances surrounding the death of a patient at the hands of a tired, German locum GP.

The independent review, commissioned by the GMC and chaired by Lord Naren Patel, covers the entire career of a doctor, from the first day at medical school to the last day in practice.

On revalidation, the report says: ‘At the very least, the GMC should provide clear guidance on what doctors will be required to do to keep up to date for the purposes of revalidation and the role of CPD within that.’

It also calls on the regulator to focus on delivering the outcomes required from training, rather than simply assuring the process. ‘What matters to patients is the quality of the doctors who treat them, not the processes by which they were trained,’ the report says.

This review is taking a long-term look at the future regulation of medical education and training as a whole and considering how this fits in with the GMC’s other responsibilities.

Niall Dickson, chief executive of the GMC, said: “We have a great opportunity now to create a system in which every stage of education and training is fit for purpose, successfully prepares the doctor for the next one, where standards are constantly rising and which treats all doctors fairly, wherever they come from and whatever stage they are at in their careers.

“I hope the consultation stimulates debate and encourages as many as possible to comment on the conclusions and recommendations of the draft report. This will help us set the way ahead and ensure a robust approach to the regulation of education and training in the years to come.”

Doctors can consult on the report until 9 March. A final report will be submitted to the GMC at the end of that month.

Compulsory training considered for foreign doctors

The Guardian - 11th January 2010 6:08 pm

Compulsory training and induction programmes for doctors who have never worked in England before are among measures being examined in a government safety review following the case of a German doctor who accidentally killed a patient on his first out-of-hours locum shift in this country.

Also under discussion is the creation of a national database that would allow NHS organisations and private providers to check whether applicants for GP work had failed in previous attempts. Employers could also find out more easily whether doctors had formal warnings or disciplinary restrictions on the work they could do when they moved from different parts of the country.

Measures to standardise the ways local NHS trusts check applicants’ standard of English and medical competence are being studied too as part of a broad review of out-of-hours work being led by David Colin-Thomé, the Department of Health’s director of clinical care, and Steve Field, chairman of the Royal College of General Practitioners who has already championed such measures. The General Medical Council, the profession’s regulator, says it is willing to hold the data nationally. Ministers would have to approve the package.

The GMC is also stepping up its campaign to change rules for recognising medical qualifications across the EU. It wants doctors from Europe to face tests on their knowledge and skills before being added to the professional register in this country, just like doctors from other parts of the world, but a European commission review of the rules is not planned until 2012.

Read more at The Guardian.

Improve recognition of overseas qualifications

By Mike Broad - 7th December 2009 9:00 am

Experienced overseas doctors - from outside Europe - should have their eligibility to work in the UK considered more favourably in future following new recommendations.  

The UK Border Agency’s Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) has reported to government that some professional qualifications should be considered equivalent to a masters level qualification, which is currently required for Tier 1 immigration in the Highly Skilled Migrant Programme.

Presently, doctors with years of experience, some of whom have passed Royal College exams or been awarded a CCT to enable them to take up a substantive consultant-level post, do not meet the educational requirements within Tier 1. In a submission earlier this year, the BMA said: “In many instances success at professional examinations and in gaining a CCT will demonstrate more sustained and greater commitment than that required to gain a master’s level qualification.”

In its report, the MAC acknowledged that professional qualifications in addition to an undergraduate medical degree are now considered equivalent to master’s degrees for the points-based system of immigration, following a recent ruling by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education.

Dr Shree Datta, chair of the BMA’s junior doctor committee, said: “It is pleasing that the MAC has today recognised the BMA’s concerns over recent immigration rule changes which could leave the NHS short of doctors. The government must now implement MAC’s recommendations to stop an exodus of UK-trained international doctors from the NHS.
“The BMA has taken hundreds of calls from UK-trained international doctors and medical students distressed with the prospect of having to uproot their families because of the Government’s arbitrary decision to raise the bar for educational attainment from a bachelor’s degree to a master’s degree. These doctors are vital to the future of the NHS.”

This development follows the Prime Minister’s recent announcement that there would be a reduction in the number of jobs for overseas doctors, and reduced the list of specialties on the shortage occupation list.  

There could also be a relaxation of the current rules which prevents overseas doctors, who have attended medical school in the UK, from completing their training here.

The MAC report calls on the UK Border Agency to consider the issue with “relevant stakeholders”. It says: “A situation where medical students can commence their medical training within the UK but cannot complete it does not appear to be optimal and we would not object to amended arrangements being put in place.”

Read the full report.

South Asian doctors deserve recognition for their contribution

By Mike Broad - 28th October 2009 1:15 pm

Migrant doctors have made a huge contribution to the NHS over the past 60 years and yet it has gone largely unrecognised.

In an attempt to rectify this, researchers at the Open University have carried out 60 interviews with retired and serving overseas-trained doctors from South Asian countries about their experiences of working as geriatricians in the NHS from 1948 to the present day. The interviewees obtained their initial medical qualifications in India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Burma and at the time of the interview ranged in age between 40 and 91.

They all followed a longstanding tradition of migrating from South Asia to the UK. Several had lived and worked in India during the colonial period, with one remarking about his teachers that “most had royal college qualifications”. He explained: “I’m one of the Midnight’s Children - I was born in 1946 just before partition. So, the British influence was very much in the family and it was sort of ingrained. And then when you see your teachers they all had their British degrees behind their names…” (born in Bihar, 1946, arrived in UK in 1972).

From its inception, the NHS depended on recruiting staff from overseas. Immigration legislation in the 1960s and 1970s targeted migrants from the Commonwealth countries. Legislation on racial discrimination in employment, enacted in 1976, and growing concerns about staff shortages in the NHS also influenced doctors’ career opportunities.

Overseas doctors can be seen as a mobile army of labour, particularly in the lower rungs of the medical hierarchy and in the less popular specialties, among which was geriatrics.

A crisis of staffing in the 1960s meant that by 1974 over 60% of consultant geriatric posts were filled by overseas trained graduates. This compared with 3% in general medicine and 9% of all NHS consultants.

This workforce development was not always viewed positively. Professors of geriatric medicine wrote to the Royal Commission on the NHS in 1976 saying: “The present pattern of education of medical students, nurses and other health personnel in Britain does not reflect the needs of this high risk group…so that elderly people have grave difficulties in attaining the healthcare appropriate to their needs…This concentration of overseas graduates in what remains a low status specialty is undesirable on many grounds.”

Contrastingly, many of the doctors interviewed expressed great enthusiasm for the NHS. For some it matched their own value systems: “I had to stay here. And I was never going back. I had a lot to go back to, wealth, position, knowing people. I would have risen there then much better, financially much better…I hope they don’t change it… There is no institution like National Health.” (born in Bombay, 1927, arrived in the UK in 1953).

Many also appreciated differences in the way doctors worked in the NHS: “I had a very good relationship with the ward sister…here we saw nurses more or less as equal and they were not subservient and you asked for their opinion about things that they were good at. You didn’t tell them, you asked them. In the Indian scene…doctors were only for doctoring and so a lot of things, even maintaining notes, we had in our hospital, we had a separate person like a clerk who went round with us and wrote down in the notes, medical notes.” (born in Bangalore, 1945, arrived in the UK in 1973).

Geriatrics was a ‘Cinderella’ specialty. In the early days of the NHS, care of older people with chronic conditions was little more than tending and took place in the back wards of large municipal hospitals, ex-Poor Law infirmaries and cottage hospitals.

Patients might go for years without seeing a doctor and were often confined to bed permanently. The founders of the geriatric specialty attempted to change this situation, in part as a more humane approach to medical care and treatment in later life but also in response to a demand to find ways to release hospital beds for use by other patients.

The specialty’s poor image resulted in marginalised groups of doctors such as GPs, women returners and migrants being recruited.

The South Asian doctors’ accounts provide testimony to the prevailing attitudes of the time towards older patients: “Geriatrics came to occupy as a second class doctors doing second class service for second class clients. I would not accept that. When I first started becoming a consultant I started here. I used to get great wad of letters. ‘Will you kindly see this patient and advise’.

“They bloody well didn’t want my advice. They wanted me to remove the body blocking their beds. And I said to myself, I will never become a clinical undertaker. Never. I have learned some medicine and I want to practice it.” (born in Bombay, 1927, arrived in the UK in 1953)

The doctors interviewed found that opportunities for career progression tended to be limited - even today more than twice (42%) as many white as overseas non white (17%) doctors are consultants in the NHS.

Geriatrics did, however, offer a way to progress. Many of those interviewed followed the pioneers in this respect, often taking the advice of senior colleagues as this doctor recalls: “Because my consultant, who was exactly like me…he was a trained cardiologist and then there were openings in geriatrics so he quickly moved into that area and he said if you want to go through the fast track up then this is a less crowded road.” (born in Madras, 1958, arrived in the UK in 1996).

But professional advancement was not always the whole story. Also important was personal achievement for both doctor and patient: “It took me five years but I got him back to work…I’m not joking, I cried that day. I cried that day when that fellow - he was a butcher - I got him back to work.” (born in Kerala, 1941, arrived in the UK in 1968).

The South Asian doctors talked not only of the stigma of working in geriatric medicine but also of personal encounters with discriminatory practices. They tended to focus on three areas where, as outsiders, they experienced discrimination: in getting their first post in the UK; when attempting to get a post as a specialist registrar; and in the allocation of discretionary merit awards and consultant positions.

Some picked out particular instances where interviews were unfairly conducted, promotions denied and work went unrecognised. Opportunities to secure promotion in the more popular specialties were few, even for experienced, well qualified doctors as preference seemed to be automatically given to UK trained doctors.

“Well chances were nil. I mean let us not beat about the bush. In those days if in an interview you found a local graduate you might as well walk off. But you could only get if there were more than one or two, three posts and you were competing amongst yourselves.” (born in Haryana, 1947, arrived in the UK in 1975).

Many found it difficult to secure posts in London and the south east and instead opted to work in more peripheral areas such as the northwest and Wales and in non-teaching hospitals where there was perceived to be less competition from UK graduates.

Those interviewed were nearly all consultants and one way of measuring their success was through the receipt of merit awards. South Asians and geriatricians were far less likely to receive merit awards than white doctors in other specialties.

“I think the main reason, without trying to be critical, is that the geriatricians had a hard, heavy, workload, clinical workload and had little time left to do other extra work, like research, publications and in terms of giving awards these other aspects were given more importance than the guy who was providing sort of a bread and butter service.

“And without trying to be cynical, maybe old schoolboy ties and that sort of thing can play a part. But I better not say anything more than that!” (born in East Bengal 1935, arrived in the UK in 1967).

Developing service provision in hospitals often meant struggling for resources for the care of older people. And South Asian doctors helped develop the idea of age-related admission to a unit which focused exclusively on older patients, with doctors, nurses and medical students trained in old age medicine. Collaborations with GPs, social workers and other professionals were also seen as essential to improving service provision.

While this research examined the challenges of the mid to late twentieth century, many of the issues that the NHS and its doctors face today remain the same.

New immigration rules exclude many non-EU doctors from training in the UK but the introduction of the European Working Time Directive has led to staff shortages, reminiscent of the earlier period. And, of course, providing good care to an ageing population continues to be a pressing issue.  

The research makes a case for the need to recognise the achievements of international medical migrants in the past, and suggests they can help the NHS and its patients in the future.

It was led by Professor Joanna Bornat and funded by the Economic and Social Research Council.

Prof Bornat said: “We wanted to record and highlight the huge contribution these doctors have made in shaping medical provision in the UK, and their experiences of working in the NHS, before these first-hand accounts were lost forever.

Their determination and dedication has meant that the quality of care for our older population has progressed at a truly tremendous rate.”

Find out more about this research.

Overseas doctors bear brunt of complaints

By Francesca Robinson - 1st October 2009 9:07 am

Overseas doctors who qualified abroad are more likely to have complaints made about their professional conduct, clinical skills or behaviour, a report reveals.

Questions are also more likely to be raised about the competence of men, older doctors and consultants than about younger medics and trainees.

The referral rate for doctors over 50 is about five times the rate for those under 40. Women doctors are two thirds less likely to be referred than men.

The analysis of over 5,000 doctors and dentists referred to the National Clinical Assessment Service, since 2001, found that half the hospital doctors whose performances give rise to complaints qualified abroad though they account for only a third of the workforce.

Non-white doctors who qualified in the UK were not more likely to be referred, suggesting that complaints were not being made on the grounds of race.

Above average numbers of psychiatrists were referred for assessment but the report says this may be partly explained by the fact that higher numbers of ethnic minority doctors who trained overseas work in the specialty. Referrals were also ‘significantly higher’ from surgery, obstetrics and gynaecology and general practice.

In 2008/09, three quarters of NHS organisations referred at least one health professional to the assessment service.

The report gives a detailed analysis of 1,472 cases it has dealt with since 2007. Two thirds of these featured concerns about clinical skills but behavioural problems were also common, seen in more than half the cases. Communication with colleagues was the most common behavioural difficulty, a problem in one in five complaints.

The NCAS was set up in 2001 to resolve disputes between doctors and their employers following a series of high-profile scandals. It receives referrals from hospitals and primary care trusts and even from individuals referring themselves.  

Among 144 cases where the most serious concerns had been raised two thirds of the doctors were back in work after remediation. The report also records that the average duration of exclusions of hospital doctors has fallen by over third since 2003.

Dr Umesh Prabhu, a consultant paediatrician at Fairfield Hospital, Bury, and a GMC and NCAS adviser, said the NHS did not have a good track record of supporting doctors when they ran into difficulties. The NCAS was now working to remedy this.

They had already held five meetings with the GMC to see how doctors needing help could be identified early and training was being given to human resources and medical directors.

“The aim is to help and support these doctors, to retrain them and get them back into the workforce. But I would like to see still more being done with medical directors taking leadership in revalidation and appraisals and using them in a supportive way.

“We need to remove the blame culture and deal with issues early and effectively so that patients can be protected and doctors supported,” said Prabhu.

Dr Michael Devlin, MDU medico-legal adviser, said: It is notable that communication with colleagues and patients features in the referrals seen by the NCAS. In the MDU’s experience, breakdowns in communication are often at the heart of concerns raised about doctors’ conduct and performance.” 

Dr Peter Old, NCAS associate medical director, who led the work of producing the report, said: “Our latest analyses of some of our most difficult cases show that most of the practitioners whose performance caused concern were able to resume safe and valued practice. That has to be the best outcome we can aim for.”