Issues
arising from the Royal College of Pathologists Council meeting
held on the 9th March 2006
The
College's input to the Carter Review had been sent with what were
supportive documents from the Royal College of Physicians, Cancer
networks and College SACs. The President has spoken to Lord Carter
subsequently and it was clear that several points raised during
his visits to Pathology departments had been taken on board. The
President would be arranging further meetings with Lord Carter,
and a meeting for members of the College when the report had been
published. This was likely to be in June/ July. It appears that
awareness of the review was low outside Pathology. Room for further
discussion to clarify issues with Lord Carter was uncertain.
The
President had been invited to be part of the implementation group
of 'Best Research for Best Health.' This was likely to have a
great impact on R&D within Trusts.
Connecting
for Health in its first draft had not considered several key aspects
of pathology including blood tracking, screening services e.g.
cytology etc.
The
new MMC framework had introduced the concept of fixed term specialty
training.It was assumed that these posts would allow employment
of SHOs who had not found a post.
The
issue of sub-consultant grades was discussed and was not in general
supported by College. There also appeared to be move away from
appointing into the Nurse Consultant grade due to its inflexibility.
These issues would continue to be discussed at the Academy of
Royal Colleges.
The
role of the Colleges in assessing competence through workplace
based assessment(360 degree appraisal etc) had also been discussed).The
College PSU would be involved in taking this forward, but the
current tools for assessment would need to be adapted for pathology.
The College would be involved in the group considering the Training
of Cancer specialists.
Members
of the Academy and COPMeD had considered the purpose and objectives
of the Joint Academy and COPMeD Specialty Training Advisory Group
(JACSTAG). This would agree UK wide approaches to implementation
of specialist training within the MMC framework.
BMJ
E-learning (on line training) had been discussed. There were clearly
possible applications to pathology training as there was a great
deal of information already available.
Indendent
Sector Treatment Centres (ISTCs) had been discussed, and the need
to consider other issues apart from cost had been stressed including
the importance of training provision. It was advocated that this
should be taken into account as part of commissioning process
for services in these units.
There
had been a useful CPD advisers meeting. The performance of the
on-line portfolio was discussed. It had been used by about 50
percent of those registered.
“Chain
of evidence” and “Release of specimens to police” documents were
circulated for comment.
The
future of fellowship, good standing and CPD were under discussion
and a document would be submitted in May to Council.
NW
England RC had reported slow responses to queries by CPA. We were
informed that CPA was soon to be peer reviewed.
It
was reported that Macclefield Hospital Trust would be selling
a site and putting out Pathology services for tender.
The
workforce database would not be funded by the DoH. It had indicated
that the database was incomplete. However it was considered essential
for workforce planning by the College. 11 new academic NTNs had
been agreed for Histopathology nationally. This was in addition
to the 100 trainees that had already been agreed by WDC. However
it was argued this may be too many for the real number of projected
vacancies. There had been a 30 percent fall in Trent. The new
consultant contract was partly responsible. The effects of changing
demography was also important. Part time working was
more common now for both men and women.
PMETB
had reduced the cost of CST and applications for article 14. It
had also requested nominations for training visits to Trusts.
Deanery
budgets had been reduced by 10 percent.
Biochemistry
SAC reported that there had been no further response from the
RCGP regarding out of hours reporting of abnormal results. Now
perceived to be PCT responsibility. There was a shortage of Clinical
Biochemistry examiners.
The
issue of CPA requirements for Immunology testing was raised by
GF. CPA had put a document on its website. It was agreed that
these would be reviewed by the Immunology SAC as there were a
number of outstanding issues.
There
was a discussion about the Human Tissue act. Those who have died
have no specific rights over tissues, although it was good practice
to ask permission from a relative. Tissue taken from patients
before death without explicit consent may require consent from
relative before use. However this appears too be dependent on
the purpose e.g. DNA analysis or not. Further clarification was
required. There would be a Consent and Confidentiality in genetic
testing paper prepared in due course. It was noted that the Human
Tissue Scotland Bill only referred to tissue taken from the dead.
The
introduction of new tests e.g. molecular tests suuch as Her2 testing
would be matter to be reviewed by a new group on Molecular testing.
PASA
had put the issue of pathology procurement on hold until after
the Carter Review report.
Executive
requested that Regional Councils discuss how to improve gender
and racial representation.
There
was a presentation by Professor Anne Green on Clinical and Laboratory
provision for Metabolic Disorders. A report edited by Hilary Bruton
was now on the web describing the future needs.
|
