Policy responses and statements
Background: This consultation document sought views on proposals for a suite of regulations which will apply to all independent healthcare services regulated by the Care Commission. The proposed regulations would replace SSI 114 Regulation of Care (Scotland) Requirements as to Care Services Regulations 2002 (the 2002 regulations) for all independent healthcare services. The Care Commission was established on 1 April 2002 under the Regulation of Care (Scotland) Act 2001 ("the Act") to regulate a wide range of care services defined in section 2 of the Act, including independent healthcare services. An independent healthcare service is defined in the Act as any of the following: (a) an independent hospital; A note of those definitions and how they are interpreted in the Act is set out in Annex A. Reason for change: The Care Commission has now had six years operational experience of regulating those independent healthcare services for which regulation commenced on 1 April 2002, including assessing their compliance with the 2002 Regulations. On the basis of the Commission's experience, the Government now consider that further specific regulations need to be made. This will ensure effective regulation of independent healthcare services before commencing regulation of any further independent healthcare services. COMMENTS ONTHE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENTA CONSULTATION PAPER ON PROPOSED REGULATION OF CARE (REQUIREMENTS AS TO INDEPENDENT HEALTHCARE SERVICES) (SCOTLAND) REGULATIONS 2008The Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh is pleased to respond to the Scottish Government on its consultation on the Proposed Changes to the Regulation of Care (Requirements as to Independent Healthcare Services) (Scotland) Regulations 2008. Q 1: Is "patient care record" the correct term? If not what term should be used and why? Previously, regulations had suggested that the term "personal plan" should be used. The new term "patient care record" is used in the National Care Standards and seems a perfectly reasonable amendment. Q 2: Should personal care records be reviewed regularly and if so how often? The record should be reviewed whenever there is a change in patient circumstances, or at six monthly intervals, whichever is the sooner. Q3: With that in mind should regulations be included to put safeguards in place for individuals who may be invited to participate in research:
A significant amount of research in these areas will be related to health services and as such will be controlled by the current Health Governance Frameworks with Ethics Committees, MREC and LREC approval. If the research is going through these processes, the College would not feel that further regulations were required. However, if research is planned from a body such as Social Work or another agency which is not included in Health Governance Frameworks, then any research from this group would need to be regulated and passed through some form of recognised ethical committee structure. Q 4: Have we covered all appropriate aspects in these draft Regulations? If not please say what we have missed and why you think regulations are needed. The regulations are reasonable, and uncontroversial. The new guidance would clearly increase the amount of paperwork generated and would take significant hours of time but would also improve clarity and documentation. There is an increasing drive for better documentation and more clarity in healthcare services and these proposed regulations continue that process.
Copies of this response are available from: Lesley Lockhart, Tel: 0131 225 7324 ext 608 [25 September 2008]
|
 |
 |