OBJECTIVE: To assess public knowledge and expectations of the ways to assess doctors' competence to ensure patient safety. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Telephone survey of a random sample of 1000 non-institutionalized Hong Kong residents. MEASURES AND RESULTS: Only 5% of public were correct that doctors are not required to periodically be assessed, and 9% were correct that the doctors are not required to update knowledge and skills for renewing their license. These results echo international studies showing a low public knowledge of medical regulation. The public overwhelmingly felt a periodic assessment (92%) and requirements for continuous medical education (91%) were important processes for assuring doctors' competence. A high proportion of the public felt that lay representation in the Medical Council was insufficient. CONCLUSION: There is a significant gap between public expectations and understanding of the existing medical regulation and the actual policies and practices. Despite a lack of public knowledge, the public thought it important to have an ongoing structured monitoring and assessment mechanism to assure doctors' competence. The public also expects a greater involvement in the regulatory processes as members of the Medical Council. There is a need to review and enhance the current regulatory system to meet public expectation and ensure accountability for the privilege and trust granted by the State in professional self-regulation. In the context of our complex health system, a thorough understanding on the dynamic interactions between different institutions and their complementary roles in a meta-regulatory framework is required in assuring patient safety.
OBJECTIVE: To assess public knowledge and expectations of the ways to assess doctors' competence to ensure patient safety. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Telephone survey of a random sample of 1000 non-institutionalized Hong Kong residents. MEASURES AND RESULTS: Only 5% of public were correct that doctors are not required to periodically be assessed, and 9% were correct that the doctors are not required to update knowledge and skills for renewing their license. These results echo international studies showing a low public knowledge of medical regulation. The public overwhelmingly felt a periodic assessment (92%) and requirements for continuous medical education (91%) were important processes for assuring doctors' competence. A high proportion of the public felt that lay representation in the Medical Council was insufficient. CONCLUSION: There is a significant gap between public expectations and understanding of the existing medical regulation and the actual policies and practices. Despite a lack of public knowledge, the public thought it important to have an ongoing structured monitoring and assessment mechanism to assure doctors' competence. The public also expects a greater involvement in the regulatory processes as members of the Medical Council. There is a need to review and enhance the current regulatory system to meet public expectation and ensure accountability for the privilege and trust granted by the State in professional self-regulation. In the context of our complex health system, a thorough understanding on the dynamic interactions between different institutions and their complementary roles in a meta-regulatory framework is required in assuring patient safety.