Ontario College of Pharmacists Self Regulation The Canadian Model.

Ontario College of Pharmacists

Self RegulationThe Canadian Model


CANADA

Ten Provinces

Two Territories


COMMON FEATURES

Self Funding

set own fees

Professional Control of

complaints

investigations

discipline


COMPLAINTS/DISCIPLINE

Processes defined by template

Professional Control


COMPLAINTS

must be written

not anonymous

may be: investigated

referred to discipline

concluded


DISCIPLINE

referral: certificate of conviction

reasonable and probable grounds misconduct

cases heard and decided by Panel

51% professional peers

49% lay members


REGULATING ONTARIO’S HEALTH PROFESSIONS

Regulated Health Professional Act (RHPA)

Open, responsive, accountable

Legal/Procedural

Scope of Practice/Titles

Who is regulated/common framework


THE RHPA

Purpose: Protect the Public

harm

fitness to practice

evolution of practice

high quality care

flexibility


PUBLIC INTEREST/SELF INTEREST

Broad versus narrow

Public appointments/meetings

Accountability to the Minister

Advisory Council


SCOPE OF PRACTICE MODEL

General description of current scope

Controlled acts

Harm provision


“The practice of pharmacy is the custody, compounding and dispensing of drugs, the provision of non-prescription drugs, health care aids and devices and the provision of information related to drug use.”


STRIKING THE BALANCE (1989)

Protection from harm

Freedom to choose from safe options

Evolution of a better health care system


WEIGHING THE BALALNCE (1999)

Is the RHPA effective, efficient, flexible, and fair?

protecting the public from harm

providing high quality care

making health professional accountable


PUBLIC INPUT

Council

Committees

Open Meetings

Open Hearings

Public Disclosure

HPRAC


COUNCIL COMPOSITION

15 elected members – community

2 elected members – hospital

= 51%

1 Dean of Pharmacy

Appointed lay members 9 - 16

= 49%


CRITERIA FOR REGULATION

Relevance to MOH jurisdiction

Risk of Harm

Sufficiency of supervision

Alternative Regulatory Mechanism

Body of Knowledge

Educational requirements for entry


CRITERIA FOR REGULATION (cont’d)

Leadership favours public interest

Likelihood of Compliance

Sufficiency of Membership


HARM

degree of risk

service provided

examples/complaints


SUFFICIENCY

membership numbers

acceptance of costs

need to maintain an Association


CONTROLLED ACTS

prescribing a hearing aid for a hearing impaired person – yes

testing hearing – no

making a hearing instrument - no


CONTROLLED ACTS

The concept of “controlled acts” is set out in RHPA. This means that no one is permitted to perform a controlled act (13 of which are specifically referred to in the Act) unless they have been authorized by their profession specific Act to do so the controlled act has been delegated to them by someone authorized to perform it.


CONTROLLED ACTS

RHPA also sets out what has become known as the “harm provision” which basically states that it is illegal for anyone other than someone acting within their own scope of practice to treat or advise a person with respect to their health where it is reasonably foreseeable that serious physical harm may result.

Ontario College of Pharmacists Self Regulation The Canadian Model.

Documents

Transcript of Ontario College of Pharmacists Self Regulation The Canadian Model.