OBJECTIVES: To describe current use and possible effects of Australian medical school fitness-to-practise policies (FTPPs), and to define and benchmark FTPP best practice. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A questionnaire-based study of Australian medical schools was conducted in August 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Use of FTPPs by medical schools; criteria used in FTPPs; remediation processes; numbers of students excluded for professional misconduct, reasons for exclusion, and year of study at time of exclusion. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 15 of 19 medical schools to which it was sent, and 12 schools reported using an FTPP. There was wide variation in the FTPP criteria used by individual schools, and use of an FTPP appeared to be independent of medical student registration with state medical boards and type of course entry. There were no apparent differences in medical student exclusion rates between schools with FTPPs and those without. The most common reason for exclusion was persistent inappropriate attitude or behaviour, including poor attendance, and most exclusions occurred by the third year of study. CONCLUSIONS: Most Australian medical schools use FTPPs, but these policies are variable and lack proven effectiveness. The variations in the numbers of students excluded by the different medical schools for unprofessional behaviour suggest discrepancies in the medical schools' abilities to detect and manage students with problems in this area. Previous calls to develop a nationally consistent approach to the management of poorly behaving students should be addressed.
OBJECTIVES: To describe current use and possible effects of Australian medical school fitness-to-practise policies (FTPPs), and to define and benchmark FTPP best practice. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A questionnaire-based study of Australian medical schools was conducted in August 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Use of FTPPs by medical schools; criteria used in FTPPs; remediation processes; numbers of students excluded for professional misconduct, reasons for exclusion, and year of study at time of exclusion. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 15 of 19 medical schools to which it was sent, and 12 schools reported using an FTPP. There was wide variation in the FTPP criteria used by individual schools, and use of an FTPP appeared to be independent of medical student registration with state medical boards and type of course entry. There were no apparent differences in medical student exclusion rates between schools with FTPPs and those without. The most common reason for exclusion was persistent inappropriate attitude or behaviour, including poor attendance, and most exclusions occurred by the third year of study. CONCLUSIONS: Most Australian medical schools use FTPPs, but these policies are variable and lack proven effectiveness. The variations in the numbers of students excluded by the different medical schools for unprofessional behaviour suggest discrepancies in the medical schools' abilities to detect and manage students with problems in this area. Previous calls to develop a nationally consistent approach to the management of poorly behaving students should be addressed.
Authors: Sandra Kemp; Wendy Hu; Jo Bishop; Kirsty Forrest; Judith N Hudson; Ian Wilson; Andrew Teodorczuk; Gary D Rogers; Chris Roberts; Andy Wearn Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2019-03-04 Impact factor: 2.463