Revalidation

Abstract

Revalidation of medical practitioners already occurs in many countries, including the UK, Canada and America. However, forensic pathologists in America have expressed dissatisfaction with the use of examinations and the system in the UK is regarded by some as too onerous. The Australia Health Practitioners Agency (AHPRA) is planning to introduce revalidation. In preparation, the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia (RCPA) formed a steering group to develop Internal Quality Assurance programmes that would meet the needs of revalidation without incurring extra work for practising pathologists. Three areas were considered: pre-analytical, analytical and post-analytical. Within forensic pathology the pre-analytical conditions are mostly dictated and are beyond control. Post-analytical would largely be regarded as court work, but it would be inappropriate to judge pathologists against outcome, as expert evidence must be independent. As forensic pathology is an opinion-based specialty, peer review would be the best method to assess standards. This is already a National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) requirement. Initial consultation by AHPRA regarding revalidation suggests that peer review will be promoted. Thus, for forensic pathology a system of peer review is proposed.