Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Research Protocols
Date Submitted: Mar 8, 2021
Date Accepted: Mar 4, 2022
Evidence for continuing professional development and recency of practice standards for regulated health professionals in Australia: protocol for a systematic review
ABSTRACT
Background:
In 2010 Australia introduced the National Registration and Accreditation Scheme which currently regulates 16 health professions under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (National Law) as enforced in each state/territory. The National Law requires that National Boards must develop, consult on and recommend certain registration standards to the Australian Health Workforce Ministerial Council. These core registration standards are generally reviewed every five years in line with good regulatory practice. The registration standards for continuing professional development (CPD) and recency of practice (ROP) for most National Boards are currently under review.
Objective:
The aim of the systematic review is to develop a current evidence base that will support the National Boards to develop more consistent, evidence-based, effective standards that are clear, easy to understand and operationalise.
Methods:
The systematic review is designed to build on earlier research commissioned and/or undertaken by the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra) for previous reviews of the CPD and ROP registration standards and is based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Databases to be searched for this review are: the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System On-line (MEDLINE) and PsycINFO (using the OVID platform), Better Evidence for Medical Education (BEME), the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Campbell Collaboration of Systematic Reviews (CCSR), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR, Database of Abstracts and Reviews of Effects (DARE), Education Resources Information Centre (ERIC), Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), OTSeeker, Physiotherapy evidence (PEDro), ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health, PROSPERO, Science Direct, Web of Science and Wiley on-line.
Results:
At March 2021, the search strategy has been tested and preliminary searches are currently underway.
Conclusions:
This protocol outlines the scope and methodology that will be used to conduct a systematic review of evidence for CPD and ROP to inform a review of the standards for regulated health professionals in Australia.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.