editorial
Editor in Chief Ian Peate Editor/Associate Publisher Julie Smith [email protected] Deputy Editor Aysha Mendes Da Mata [email protected] Subeditors Daniel Davies [email protected] Lauran Elsden [email protected] Commissioning Editor Sue Woodward Group Classified Director Rachel McElhinney [email protected] Circulation Director Sally Boettcher [email protected] Associate Publisher Chloe Benson [email protected] Associate Publisher/MedEd Manager Tracy Cowan [email protected] Classified Sales Executive Harry Nolan Production Manager Jon Redmayne Production Assistant Larry Oakes Editorial Make-up Lindsey Butlin Publisher Anthony Kerr Chief Executive Officer Ben Allen UK Personal subscription rates
Quarterly Direct Debit Annual Direct Debit Annual Credit Card 2yr Annual Credit Card 3yr Annual Credit Card
£42 £164 £173 £294 £415
Subscribe online: www.magsubscriptions.com, Subscribe by phone: +44 (0) 1722 716997 MA Healthcare Ltd is part of the Mark Allen Group
www.markallengroup.com The British Journal of Nursing is published by MA Healthcare Ltd, St Jude’s Church, Dulwich Road, London SE24 0PB Tel: 020 7738 5454 Editorial: 020 7501 6716 Sales: 020 7501 6726 Email: [email protected] Websites: www.britishjournalofnursing.com © MA Healthcare Ltd, 2013. All rights reserved. No part of the British Journal of Nursing may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without prior written permission of the Publishing Director. The British Journal of Nursing is a double-blind, peerreviewed journal. It is indexed on the main databases, including the International Nursing Index, Medline and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) ISSN 0966 – 0461 Print: Pensord Press Ltd, Blackwood, NP12 2YA Distribution: Comag Distribution, West Drayton, UB7 7QE Cover picture: iStockphoto.com
The paper used within this publication has been sourced from Chain-of-Custody certified manufacturers, operating within international environmental standards, to ensure sustainable sourcing of the raw materials, sustainable production and to minimise our carbon footprint.
British Journal of Nursing, 2013, Vol 22, No 19
NMC to implement new revalidation for nurses
T
he NMC is currently developing and implementing a system of revalidation for nurses and midwives. The key aim is to ensure that nurses on the professional register are fit to practise and are competent in the provision of safe and effective care. The new revalidation system has to include a means of checking that nurses are able to meet the NMC standards, with regards to their conduct and competence as well as demonstrating they have kept their skills and knowledge up to date. This is a requirement as well as a public expectation. Currently, as required by legislation (Post Registration Education and Practice (PREP)), nurses must continue to renew their registration every 3 years, affirming that they have practised for 450 hours during that 3-year period. The amount of continuing professional development (CPD) required is to be reviewed along with an appropriate definition of CPD activity. Public protection is at the heart of whatever revalidation system is finally agreed upon. However, it must be robust enough to ensure a proportionate, risk-based and affordable system offering greater public confidence in those nurses regulated by the NMC. The system implemented will, it is hoped, focus on the notion of the nurse as a life-long learner. Revalidation has the potential to raise standards of care if it is thought through and not rushed. It is acknowledged that this task is huge and that it will require a considerable programme of work that will need to be completed (fully) before the NMC launching revalidation. Nurses need to have their say so that whatever system is chosen reflects the views of nurses (among others), as it is we who will be expected to comply with the requirements of the new revalidation system. In the proposed model that the NMC Council agreed, a third party (for example an employer or manager) is required to confirm that the nurse who is seeking revalidating is conforming to the tenets of the revised Code (the Code and standards are to be reviewed and revised to ensure they are compatible with revalidation). It is envisaged that this confirmation will consider feedback from patients, service users, carers and colleagues. This desire to include feedback from patients and the public as a part of revalidation is being seen as another way of enhancing public protection. Furthermore, the Francis report recommended that the information that feeds into revalidation should contain evidence from patients and their families. The NMC will undertake regular monitoring of revalidation submissions that the nurse puts forward or is called to put forward. The approach to be used
will engage a random and a risk-based method.This random approach needs to be given much thought as this is akin to the present system (PREP) and I think this is left wanting. Nurses on the register will be revalidated every 3 years and those failing to do so successfully will be removed from the register. All nurses are required to confirm that they continue to remain fit to practise, have met the required hours of practice and CPD, have received third party feedback that informs reflection on their practice and confirms their fitness to practise. The NMC’s suggestions are in the early stages but the revised Code and standards are to be launched at the end of 2014, and revalidation is to be up and running by the end of 2015, subjecting nurses to a more rigorous form of review. A similar system of revalidation was introduced a year ago by the General Medical Council (GMC) requiring doctors to revalidate every 5 years (not 3). We would be wise to engage with our medical colleagues and listen to their trials and tribulations. There will be a need to ensure funding is available, regardless of whatever well-intentioned revalidation system is implemented, as well as a close working relationship between the nurse, employer and regulator for it to truly enhance public protection. As the health and social services continue to learn lessons from the recommendations of the Francis Report, it is reassuring to see that the NMC is playing its part in considering how the governance of nurses can be adapted to ensure high quality and consistent care as well as restoring public confidence in the profession. Anything that supports our continuing determination for excellence and ensures quality of patient care can only be a good thing. Monitoring a nurse’s commitment to professional development and assessing their fitness to practise is, I think, the hallmark of any professional and profession. I, like the Department of Health, broadly welcome this move, but I shall be watching closely how developments unfurl. If these proposals are taken forward in a considered way, I believe they have the potential to provide very positive developments for BJN patient care.
Ian Peate
Editor in Chief British Journal of Nursing
The NMC comments on the new system over the page.
1099 © MA Healthcare Ltd. Downloaded from magonlinelibrary.com by 192.148.225.018 on September 22, 2016. Use for licensed purposes only. No other uses without permission. All rights reserved.
Editor in Chief Ian Peate Editor/Associate Publisher Julie Smith [email protected] Deputy Editor Aysha Mendes Da Mata [email protected] Subeditors Daniel Davies [email protected] Lauran Elsden [email protected] Commissioning Editor Sue Woodward Group Classified Director Rachel McElhinney [email protected] Circulation Director Sally Boettcher [email protected] Associate Publisher Chloe Benson [email protected] Associate Publisher/MedEd Manager Tracy Cowan [email protected] Classified Sales Executive Harry Nolan Production Manager Jon Redmayne Production Assistant Larry Oakes Editorial Make-up Lindsey Butlin Publisher Anthony Kerr Chief Executive Officer Ben Allen UK Personal subscription rates
Quarterly Direct Debit Annual Direct Debit Annual Credit Card 2yr Annual Credit Card 3yr Annual Credit Card
£42 £164 £173 £294 £415
Subscribe online: www.magsubscriptions.com, Subscribe by phone: +44 (0) 1722 716997 MA Healthcare Ltd is part of the Mark Allen Group
www.markallengroup.com The British Journal of Nursing is published by MA Healthcare Ltd, St Jude’s Church, Dulwich Road, London SE24 0PB Tel: 020 7738 5454 Editorial: 020 7501 6716 Sales: 020 7501 6726 Email: [email protected] Websites: www.britishjournalofnursing.com © MA Healthcare Ltd, 2013. All rights reserved. No part of the British Journal of Nursing may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without prior written permission of the Publishing Director. The British Journal of Nursing is a double-blind, peerreviewed journal. It is indexed on the main databases, including the International Nursing Index, Medline and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) ISSN 0966 – 0461 Print: Pensord Press Ltd, Blackwood, NP12 2YA Distribution: Comag Distribution, West Drayton, UB7 7QE Cover picture: iStockphoto.com
The paper used within this publication has been sourced from Chain-of-Custody certified manufacturers, operating within international environmental standards, to ensure sustainable sourcing of the raw materials, sustainable production and to minimise our carbon footprint.
British Journal of Nursing, 2013, Vol 22, No 19
NMC to implement new revalidation for nurses
T
he NMC is currently developing and implementing a system of revalidation for nurses and midwives. The key aim is to ensure that nurses on the professional register are fit to practise and are competent in the provision of safe and effective care. The new revalidation system has to include a means of checking that nurses are able to meet the NMC standards, with regards to their conduct and competence as well as demonstrating they have kept their skills and knowledge up to date. This is a requirement as well as a public expectation. Currently, as required by legislation (Post Registration Education and Practice (PREP)), nurses must continue to renew their registration every 3 years, affirming that they have practised for 450 hours during that 3-year period. The amount of continuing professional development (CPD) required is to be reviewed along with an appropriate definition of CPD activity. Public protection is at the heart of whatever revalidation system is finally agreed upon. However, it must be robust enough to ensure a proportionate, risk-based and affordable system offering greater public confidence in those nurses regulated by the NMC. The system implemented will, it is hoped, focus on the notion of the nurse as a life-long learner. Revalidation has the potential to raise standards of care if it is thought through and not rushed. It is acknowledged that this task is huge and that it will require a considerable programme of work that will need to be completed (fully) before the NMC launching revalidation. Nurses need to have their say so that whatever system is chosen reflects the views of nurses (among others), as it is we who will be expected to comply with the requirements of the new revalidation system. In the proposed model that the NMC Council agreed, a third party (for example an employer or manager) is required to confirm that the nurse who is seeking revalidating is conforming to the tenets of the revised Code (the Code and standards are to be reviewed and revised to ensure they are compatible with revalidation). It is envisaged that this confirmation will consider feedback from patients, service users, carers and colleagues. This desire to include feedback from patients and the public as a part of revalidation is being seen as another way of enhancing public protection. Furthermore, the Francis report recommended that the information that feeds into revalidation should contain evidence from patients and their families. The NMC will undertake regular monitoring of revalidation submissions that the nurse puts forward or is called to put forward. The approach to be used
will engage a random and a risk-based method.This random approach needs to be given much thought as this is akin to the present system (PREP) and I think this is left wanting. Nurses on the register will be revalidated every 3 years and those failing to do so successfully will be removed from the register. All nurses are required to confirm that they continue to remain fit to practise, have met the required hours of practice and CPD, have received third party feedback that informs reflection on their practice and confirms their fitness to practise. The NMC’s suggestions are in the early stages but the revised Code and standards are to be launched at the end of 2014, and revalidation is to be up and running by the end of 2015, subjecting nurses to a more rigorous form of review. A similar system of revalidation was introduced a year ago by the General Medical Council (GMC) requiring doctors to revalidate every 5 years (not 3). We would be wise to engage with our medical colleagues and listen to their trials and tribulations. There will be a need to ensure funding is available, regardless of whatever well-intentioned revalidation system is implemented, as well as a close working relationship between the nurse, employer and regulator for it to truly enhance public protection. As the health and social services continue to learn lessons from the recommendations of the Francis Report, it is reassuring to see that the NMC is playing its part in considering how the governance of nurses can be adapted to ensure high quality and consistent care as well as restoring public confidence in the profession. Anything that supports our continuing determination for excellence and ensures quality of patient care can only be a good thing. Monitoring a nurse’s commitment to professional development and assessing their fitness to practise is, I think, the hallmark of any professional and profession. I, like the Department of Health, broadly welcome this move, but I shall be watching closely how developments unfurl. If these proposals are taken forward in a considered way, I believe they have the potential to provide very positive developments for BJN patient care.
Ian Peate
Editor in Chief British Journal of Nursing
The NMC comments on the new system over the page.
1099 © MA Healthcare Ltd. Downloaded from magonlinelibrary.com by 192.148.225.018 on September 22, 2016. Use for licensed purposes only. No other uses without permission. All rights reserved.
