Outcomes of notifications to health practitioner boards: a retrospective cohort study

The Ethics of Overlapping Relationships in Rural and Remote Healthcare. A Narrative Review

It is presently unclear whether a distinct "rural ethics" of navigating professional boundaries exists, and if so, what theoretical approaches may assist practitioners to manage overlapping relationships. To be effective clinicians while concurrently partaking in community life, practitioners must develop and maintain safe, ethical, and sustainable therapeutic relationships in rural and remote healthcare. A narrative review was conducted identifying a significant body of qualitative and theoretical literature which explores the pervasiveness of dual relationships for practitioners working in rural and remote healthcare. Rather than viewing dual relationships as ethically unacceptable, much contemporary work focusses on the lived experiences of healthcare workers and explores what approaches may be available that both protect the therapeutic relationship while recognizing the unique nature of rural and remote healthcare practice. We conclude that practitioners must have a means of operating within a contextually informed ethics of professional boundaries. Drawing on pre-existing work, one schema is proposed that could form the basis for further engagement through interactive teaching sessions, professional development, mentoring, or guidelines.

Pharmacist Disciplinary Action: What Do Pharmacists Get in Trouble for?

Objective

This study aims to determine the reasons for disciplinary action and resultant consequences for Canadian pharmacists and any associations with demographic factors.

Methods

Regulatory body disciplinary action cases from 10 Canadian provinces were coded. Demographic information was coded.

Results

There were 665 pharmacist cases from nine provinces between January 2010 and December 2020. The rate of disciplinary action was low (1.37 cases/1,000 practitioners/year). Professional misconduct was the most common category of violation. Male pharmacists were overrepresented in disciplinary action cases. Most cases involved community pharmacists.

Conclusion

This study is the first, to our knowledge, in Canada to analyze the demographic factors of pharmacists subjected to disciplinary action. It updates a previous review of pharmacist disciplinary action (Foong et al. 2018).

Dentist Disciplinary Action: What Do Dentists Get in Trouble for?

Objective

This study aims to determine the reasons for disciplinary action, the consequences and any associations with demographic factors for Canadian dentists.

Methods

Publicly available regulatory body disciplinary action cases from 10 Canadian provinces were coded. Demographic factors were also coded.

Results

There were 344 dentist cases from five provinces between January 2010 and December 2020. The rate of disciplinary action was low (1.38 cases/1,000 practitioners/year). Clinical incompetence was the most common category of disciplinary action, followed by professional misconduct and dishonest business practices. Male dentists were overrepresented in the disciplinary action cases compared to the rest of the workforce.

Conclusion

This study is the first, to our knowledge, to describe the outcomes of regulatory body disciplinary action for Canadian dentists.

Grading pharmacists' risk of complaints to a regulator: A retrospective cohort study

Background: Tools to grade risk of complaint to a regulatory board have been developed for physicians but not for other health practitioner groups, including pharmacists. We aimed to develop a score that classified pharmacists into low, medium and high risk categories. Methods: Registration and complaint data were sourced from Ontario College of Pharmacists for January 2009 to December 2019. We undertook recurrent event survival analysis to predict lodgement of a complaint. We identified those variables that were associated with a complaint and included these in a risk score which we called PRONE-Pharm (Predicted Risk of New Event for Pharmacists). We assessed diagnostic accuracy and used this to identify thresholds that defined low, medium and high risk. Results: We identified 3,675 complaints against 17,308 pharmacists. Being male (HR = 1.72), older age (HR range 1.43-1.54), trained internationally (HR = 1.62), ≥1 prior complaint (HR range 2.83-9.60), and complaints about mental health or substance use (HR = 1.91), compliance with conditions (HR = 1.86), fees and servicing (HR = 1.74), interpersonal behaviour or honesty (HR = 1.40), procedures (HR = 1.75) and treatment or communication or other clinical issues (HR = 1.22) were all associated with lodgement of a complaint. When converted into the PRONE-Pharm risk score, pharmacists were assigned between 0 and 98 points with higher scores closely associated with higher probability of a complaint. A score of ≥25 had sufficient accuracy for classifying medium-risk pharmacists (specificity = 87.0%) and ≥45 for high-risk pharmacists (specificity = 98.4%). Conclusion: Distinguishing isolated incidents from persistent problems poses a significant challenge for entities responsible for the regulation of pharmacists and other health practitioners. The diagnostic properties of PRONE-Pharm (minimizing the false positives) means that the risk score is useful for "ruling-out" low risk pharmacists using routinely collected regulatory data. PRONE-Pharm may be useful when used alongside interventions appropriately matched to a pharmacist's level of risk.

Eyes and Ears on Patient Safety: Sources of Notifications About the Health, Performance, and Conduct of Health Practitioners

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to describe the sources of notifications of concern ("notifications") regarding the health, performance, and conduct of health practitioners from 14 registered professions in Australia.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed 43,256 notifications lodged with the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency and the Health Professional Councils Authority between 2011 and 2016. We used descriptive statistical analysis to describe the characteristics of these notifications, including their source, issue and domain, and subject.

RESULTS

Patients and their relatives lodged more than three-quarters (78%) of notifications regarding clinical performance, including diagnosis, treatment, and communication. Fellow practitioners were a common source of notifications about advertising and titles. Self-reports commonly related to health impairments, such as mental illness or substance use. Other agencies played a role in reporting concerns about prescribing or supply of medicines.

CONCLUSIONS

Various actors in the healthcare system play different roles in sketching the picture of healthcare quality and safety that notifications present to regulators. Improved understanding of which sources are most likely to raise which concerns may enhance regulators' ability to identify and respond to patient safety risks.

Does greater patient involvement in healthcare decision-making affect malpractice complaints? A large case vignette survey

Background

Although research findings consistently find poor communication about medical procedures to be a key predictor of patient complaints, compensation claims, and malpractice lawsuits (“complaints”), there is insufficient evidence to determine if greater patient involvement could actually affect the inclination to complain.

Objectives

We conducted an experimental case vignette survey that explores whether greater patient involvement in decision-making is likely to influence the intention to complain given different decisions and consequences.

Methods

Randomized, national case vignette survey with various levels of patient involvement, decisions, and outcomes in a representative Danish sample of men. We used prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening in men aged 45 to 70 years as the intervention illustrated in 30 different versions of a mock clinical encounter. Versions differed in the amount of patient involvement, the decision made (PSA test or no PSA test), and the clinical outcomes (no cancer detected, detection of treatable cancer, and detection of non-treatable cancer). We measured respondents’ inclination to complain about care in response to the scenarios on a 5-point Likert scale (from 1: very unlikely to 5: very likely).

Results

The response rate was 30% (6,756 of 22,288). Across all scenarios, the likelihood of complaint increased if the clinical outcome was poor (untreatable cancer). Compared with scenarios that involved shared decision-making (SDM), neutral information, or nudging in favor of screening, the urge to complain increased if the patient was excluded from decision-making or if the doctor had nudged the patient to decline screening (mean Likert differences .12 to .16, p < .001). With neutral involvement or nudging in favor of intervention, the desire to complain depended highly on the decision reached and on the patient’s course. This dependence was smaller with SDM.

Conclusions

Greater patient involvement in decision-making appears to be associated with less intention to complain about health care, with SDM resulting in the greatest reduction in complaint likelihood.

Serious misconduct of health professionals in disciplinary tribunals under the National Law 2010-17

Objective There is a gap in knowledge regarding serious disciplinary matters concerning health professionals under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Act 2009 (hereafter 'National Law'). The present study applies a typology of misconduct to the first 7 years of available tribunal cases under the National Law brought against the five most populous regulated health professions with the overarching goal of mapping the relationship between type of misconduct and outcome. As subquestions, the study examined whether the ostensibly uniform law is producing consistency of outcomes, both between the professions and between jurisdictions. Methods All publicly available Australian tribunal-level decisions concerning complaints of serious misconduct and/or impairment brought against the five most populous regulated health professions (nurses and midwives, doctors, psychologists, pharmacists, and dentists) were gathered from 1 July 2010 to 30 June 2017. Decisions were coded for case and respondent attributes, the type/s of misconduct alleged, whether proved, and the relevant disciplinary outcome. Respondent attributes were: profession, sex, legal representation, and certain identified 'risk' factors from previous studies. The type of allegation was coded based on five main categories or heads of misconduct, with subtypes within each. Outcomes for proved conduct were coded and categorised for severity. Analyses of cases was conducted using SPSS, version 21 (IBM, New York, NY, USA). Data was subject to statistical analysis using Pearson's Chi-squared test with an α value of 0.05. Results Major variations were identified in outcomes across the professions, with doctors being subject to less severe outcomes than other professions, in particular compared with nurses, even when the same main head of misconduct was in issue. Differences in legal representation did not completely account for such variation. Marked disparities were also identified between outcomes in different states and territories, suggesting that the National Law is not being applied in a uniform manner. Conclusion Tribunal cases reflected complaint data in that: (1) male practitioners were greatly over-represented as respondents; (2) outcomes were most severe for sexual misconduct and least severe for clinical care; and (3) doctors faced less severe outcomes than other professions. There were also significant variations in severity of outcome by jurisdiction. Variations were more pronounced when deregistration was the focus of analysis. What is known about this topic? Existing research on complaints data under the National Law in place since 2010 has suggested that doctors may be receiving less severe outcomes than other professions at board level. There is a gap in knowledge concerning serious disciplinary matters heard by tribunals. Unlike data on complaints against regulated health professionals collated by AHPRA, legal tribunals, which hear only the most serious matters, do not record data on cases in a consistent or centralised form. What does this paper add? This study is the first to compare tribunal outcomes for the five most populous professions by reference to the type of misconduct proved. The finding that different professions are receiving different outcomes for the same malfeasance is novel. Other novel findings include significant variations in severity of outcome by jurisdiction, more pronounced variations in outcomes by both profession and jurisdiction when deregistration was the focus of analysis and variations in outcome according to legal representation. What are the implications for practitioners? There are major implications for policy makers and decision makers in terms of whether the National Law is operating consistently, with important outcomes for practitioners in terms of equitable and fair treatment when facing disciplinary charges.

Sexual misconduct by health professionals in Australia, 2011-2016: a retrospective analysis of notifications to health regulators

OBJECTIVES

To assess the numbers of notifications to health regulators alleging sexual misconduct by registered health practitioners in Australia, by health care profession.

DESIGN, SETTING

Retrospective cohort study; analysis of Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency and NSW Health Professional Councils Authority data on notifications of sexual misconduct during 2011-2016.

PARTICIPANTS

All registered practitioners in 15 health professions.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Notification rates (per 10 000 practitioner-years) and adjusted rate ratios (aRRs) by age, sex, profession, medical specialty, and practice location.

RESULTS

Regulators received 1507 sexual misconduct notifications for 1167 of 724 649 registered health practitioners (0.2%), including 208 practitioners (18%) who were the subjects of more than one report during 2011-2016; 381 notifications (25%) alleged sexual relationships, 1126 (75%) sexual harassment or assault. Notifications regarding sexual relationships were more frequent for psychiatrists (15.2 notifications per 10 000 practitioner-years), psychologists (5.0 per 10 000 practitioner-years), and general practitioners (6.4 per 10 000 practitioner-years); the rate was higher for regional/rural than metropolitan practitioners (aRR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.31-2.30). Notifications of sexual harassment or assault more frequently named male than female practitioners (aRR, 37.1; 95% CI, 26.7-51.5). A larger proportion of notifications of sexual misconduct than of other forms of misconduct led to regulatory sanctions (242 of 709 closed cases [34%] v 5727 of 23 855 [24%]).

CONCLUSIONS

While notifications alleging sexual misconduct by health practitioners are rare, such misconduct has serious consequences for patients, practitioners, and the community. Further efforts are needed to prevent sexual misconduct in health care and to ensure thorough investigation of alleged misconduct.

Characteristics and predictors of regulatory immediate action imposed on registered health practitioners in Australia: a retrospective cohort study

Objective Immediate action is an emergency power available to Australian health practitioner regulatory boards to protect the public. The aim of this study was to better understand the frequency, determinants and characteristics of immediate action use in Australia. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of 11200 health practitioners named in notifications to the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) between January 2011 and December 2013. All cases were followed until December 2016 to determine their final outcome. Results Of 13939 finalised notifications, 3.7% involved immediate action and 9.7% resulted in restrictive final action. Among notifications where restrictive final action was taken, 79% did not involve prior immediate action. Among notifications where immediate action was taken, 48% did not result in restrictive final action. Compared with notifications from the public, the odds of immediate action were higher for notifications lodged by employers (mandatory notifications OR=21.3, 95% CI 13.7-33.2; non-mandatory notifications OR=10.9, 95% CI 6.7-17.8) and by other health practitioners (mandatory notifications OR=11.6, 95% CI 7.6-17.8). Odds of immediate action were also higher if the notification was regulator-initiated (OR=11.6, 95% CI 7.6-17.8), lodged by an external agency such as the police (OR=11.8, 95% CI 7.7-18.1) or was a self-notification by the health practitioner themselves (OR=9.4, 95% CI 5.5-16.0). The odds of immediate action were higher for notifications about substance abuse (OR=9.9, 95% CI 6.9-14.2) and sexual misconduct (OR=5.3, 95% CI 3.5-8.3) than for notifications about communication and clinical care. Conclusions Health practitioner regulatory boards in Australia rarely used immediate action as a regulatory tool, but were more likely to do so in response to mandatory notifications or notifications pertaining to substance abuse or sexual misconduct. What is known about this topic Health practitioner regulatory boards protect the public from harm and maintain quality and standards of health care. Where the perceived risk to public safety is high, boards may suspend or restrict the practice of health practitioners before an investigation has concluded. What does this paper add? This paper is the first study in Australia, and the largest internationally, to examine the frequency, characteristics and predictors of the use of immediate action by health regulatory boards. Although immediate action is rarely used, it is most commonly employed in response to mandatory notifications or notifications pertaining to substance abuse or sexual misconduct. What are the implications for practitioners? Immediate action is a vital regulatory tool. Failing to immediately sanction a health practitioner may expose the public to preventable harm, whereas imposing immediate action where allegations are unfounded can irreparably damage a health practitioner's career. We hope that this study will assist boards to balance the interests of the public with those of health practitioners.

A systematic integrative review of the literature on midwives and student midwives engaged in problematic substance use

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic integrative review was to review the literature in relation to problematic substance use (PSU) in midwifery populations. Associated aims were to aggregate existing knowledge about midwives and student midwives' personal engagement in PSU, to generate a holistic conceptualisation and synthesis of the existing literature regarding midwives and student midwives personally engaged in PSU and to present new understandings and perspectives to inform the development of future research questions. This review is the first of its kind.

DESIGN

Systematic searches were conducted in CINAHL, Academic Search Complete, MEDLINE, PSYCInfo, Scopus and the Cochrane Library. Findings were grouped into themes and subthemes relating to both midwives and student midwives and then analysed critically in relation to the wider literature. A quality assessment was conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The PRISMA statement was used to guide reporting.

SETTING

Included studies were conducted in Scotland, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand.

PARTICIPANTS

Studies included a total of 6,182 participants.

FINDINGS

A total of 3 studies were included. All included study types comprised quantitative survey designs, yet one also included a mixed methods design with the use of semi structured interviews. Two overarching themes emerged relating to both midwives and student midwives engaged in problematic substance use. For midwives, three subthemes are described: harmful daily alcohol consumption, working hours and harmful daily alcohol consumption and features associated with harmful daily alcohol consumption. For student midwives, two subthemes are presented: escape avoidance and alcohol, tobacco and cannabis use.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence available in relation to problematic substance use in midwifery populations in comparison to that available for other healthcare populations. Further research is required, and could usefully focus upon midwives and student midwives as distinct professions to be separated out from the wider healthcare workforce.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Problematic substance use among the healthcare workforce is associated with an increase in medical errors and inadequate care. Those affected can be reluctant to seek help, experience psychological distress and even contemplate suicide. Whilst evidence remains lacking for midwifery populations, they form a part of the general healthcare workforce and are exposed to similar workplace stressors. As such, it is likely that they too would be affected in similar ways.

Complaint risk among mental health practitioners compared with physical health practitioners: a retrospective cohort study of complaints to health regulators in Australia

OBJECTIVES

To understand complaint risk among mental health practitioners compared with physical health practitioners.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study, using incidence rate ratios (IRRs) to analyse complaint risk and a multivariate regression model to identify predictors of complaints.

SETTING

National study using complaints data from health regulators in Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

All psychiatrists and psychologists ('mental health practitioners') and all physicians, optometrists, physiotherapists, osteopaths and chiropractors ('physical health practitioners') registered to practice in Australia between 2011 and 2016.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Incidence rates, source and nature of complaints to regulators.

RESULTS

In total, 7903 complaints were lodged with regulators over the 6-year period. Most complaints were lodged by patients and their families. Mental health practitioners had a complaint rate that was more than twice that of physical health practitioners (complaints per 1000 practice years: psychiatrists 119.1 vs physicians 48.0, p<0.001; psychologists 21.9 vs other allied health 7.5, p<0.001). Their risk of complaints was especially high in relation to reports, records, confidentiality, interpersonal behaviour, sexual boundary breaches and the mental health of the practitioner. Among mental health practitioners, male practitioners (psychiatrists IRR: 1.61, 95% CI 1.39 to 1.85; psychologists IRR: 1.85, 95% CI 1.65 to 2.07) and older practitioners (≥65 years compared with 36-45 years: psychiatrists IRR 2.37, 95% CI 1.95 to 2.89; psychologists IRR 1.78, 95% CI 1.47 to 2.14) were at increased risk of complaints.

CONCLUSIONS

Mental health practitioners were more likely to be the subject of complaints than physical health practitioners. Areas of increased risk are related to professional ethics, communication skills and the health of mental health practitioners themselves. Further research could usefully explore whether addressing these risk factors through training, professional development and practitioner health initiatives may reduce the risk of complaints about mental health practitioners.

Identification of practitioners at high risk of complaints to health profession regulators

Background

Some health practitioners pose substantial threats to patient safety, yet early identification of them is notoriously difficult. We aimed to develop an algorithm for use by regulators in prospectively identifying practitioners at high risk of attracting formal complaints about health, conduct or performance issues.

Methods

Using 2011—2016 data from the national regulator of health practitioners in Australia, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of 14 registered health professions. We used recurrent-event survival analysis to estimate the risk of a complaint and used the results of this analysis to develop an algorithm for identifying practitioners at high risk of complaints. We evaluated the algorithm’s discrimination, calibration and predictive properties.

Results

Participants were 715,415 registered health practitioners (55% nurses, 15% doctors, 6% midwives, 5% psychologists, 4% pharmacists, 15% other). The algorithm, PRONE-HP (Predicted Risk of New Event for Health Practitioners), incorporated predictors for sex, age, profession and specialty, number of prior complaints and complaint issue. Discrimination was good (C-index = 0·77, 95% CI 0·76–0·77). PRONE-HP’s score values were closely calibrated with risk of a future complaint: practitioners with a score ≤ 4 had a 1% chance of a complaint within 24 months and those with a score ≥ 35 had a higher than 85% chance. Using the 90th percentile of scores within each profession to define “high risk”, the predictive accuracy of PRONE-HP was good for doctors and dentists (PPV = 93·1% and 91·6%, respectively); moderate for chiropractors (PPV = 71·1%), psychologists (PPV = 54·9%), pharmacists (PPV = 39·9%) and podiatrists (PPV = 34·0%); and poor for other professions.

Conclusions

The performance of PRONE-HP in predicting complaint risks varied substantially across professions. It showed particular promise for flagging doctors and dentists at high risk of accruing further complaints. Close review of available information on flagged practitioners may help to identify troubling patterns and imminent risks to patients.

Will I lose my license for that? A closer look at Canadian disciplinary hearings and what it means for pharmacists' practice to full scope

Objective

Concerns about liability from clinical errors have been cited as a barrier preventing greater adoption of practice change. Our objective was to determine the most common actions or omissions that result in disciplinary action for pharmacists and the restrictive actions imposed.

Methods

Canadian disciplinary reports were reviewed. Cases were coded as charges of professional misconduct, unskilled practice or dishonest business practices.

Results

There were 558 disciplinary cases from 10 provinces that occurred between January 2010 and July 2017. Professional misconduct charges commonly involved stealing/diverting or inappropriately dispensing narcotic drugs, pharmacy supervision/premises charges and refusing to cooperate with the college. Charges of unskilled practice included dispensing the wrong drug, failing to assess the appropriateness of a drug order, providing the wrong dose and failing to counsel. Fraudulent billing practices and accepting rebates from generic drug companies were the most common dishonest business practices. Professional misconduct, unskilled practice and dishonest business practice charges were involved in 342 (61%), 169 (30%) and 191 (34%) cases, respectively. Most cases occurred in community pharmacies and were not caused by an isolated clinical error. Fines were the most common penalty, followed by temporary license suspensions, professional development and reprimands. License revocations were the least common (4%), often involving professional misconduct.

Conclusion

This review suggests that disciplinary action against a pharmacist for an isolated, unintentional clinical error is uncommon and that losing a license is rare. Fear of disciplinary action should not be a barrier to practice change or the provision of full-scope patient care services.

Complaints about dental practitioners: an analysis of 6 years of complaints about dentists, dental prosthetists, oral health therapists, dental therapists and dental hygienists in Australia

BACKGROUND

Previous research has found dental practitioners at elevated risk of complaint compared with other health professions. This study aimed to describe the frequency, nature and risk factors for complaints involving dental practitioners.

METHODS

We assembled a national dataset of complaints about registered health practitioners in Australia between January 2011 and December 2016. We classified complaints into 23 issues across three domains: health, performance and conduct. We compared rates of complaints about dental practitioners and other health practitioners. We used negative binomial regression analysis to identify factors associated with complaints.

RESULTS

Dental practitioners made up 3.5% of health practitioners, yet accounted for approximately 10% of complaints. Dental practitioners had the highest rate of complaints among fourteen health professions (42.7 per 1000 practitioners per year) with higher rates among dentists and dental prosthetists than allied dental practitioners. Male practitioners were at a higher risk of complaints. Most complaints about dentists related to treatments and procedures (59%). Around 4% of dentists received more than one complaint, accounting for 49% of complaints about dentists. In 60% of closed cases no regulatory action was required. Around 13% of complaints resulted in restrictive actions, such as conditions on practice.

CONCLUSION

Improved understanding of patterns may assist regulatory boards and professional associations to ensure competent practice and protect patient safety.

Health, performance and conduct concerns among older doctors: A retrospective cohort study of notifications received by medical regulators in Australia

Objectives

To determine whether ‘older doctors’ (aged over 65) are at higher risk of notifications to the medical regulator than ‘younger doctors’ (aged 36–60 years) regarding their health, performance and/or conduct.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting

National dataset of 12,878 notifications lodged with medical regulators in Australia between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2014.

Participants

All registered doctors in Australia aged 36–60 and >65 years during the study period.

Main outcome measures

Incidence rates of notifications and incidence rate ratios of notifications (older versus younger doctors).

Results

Older doctors had higher notification rates (90.9 compared with 66.6 per 1000 practitioner years, p < 0.001). Sex-adjusted incidence rate ratios showed that older doctors had a higher risk of notifications relating to physical illness or cognitive decline (incidence rate ratio = 15.54), inadequate record keeping (incidence rate ratio = 1.98), unlawful use or supply of medications (incidence rate ratio = 2.26), substandard certificates/reports (incidence rate ratio = 2.02), inappropriate prescribing (incidence rate ratio = 1.99), disruptive behaviours (incidence rate ratio = 1.37) and substandard treatment (incidence rate ratio = 1.24). Older doctors had lower notification rates relating to mental illness and substance misuse (incidence rate ratio = 0.58) and for performance issues relating to problems with procedures (incidence rate ratio = 0.61).

Conclusions

Older doctors were at higher risk for notifications relating to physical or cognitive impairment, records and reports, prescribing or supply of medicines, disruptive behaviour and treatment. They were at lower risk for notifications about mental illness or substance misuse. Incorporating knowledge of these patterns into regulatory practices, workplace adjustments and continuing education/assessment could enhance patient care.

Correction to: Outcomes of notifications to health practitioner boards: a retrospective cohort study

The original article [1] contains a major error whereby all rates in Table 2 are mistakenly presented as 50% of their true values; this error was caused by a miscalculation in annualising the original values that represented the rates.