• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Health Services Research & Policy >Regulating the health care workforce: next steps for research
【24h】

Regulating the health care workforce: next steps for research

机译：规范医护人员：研究的下一步

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This article explores the recent ferment surrounding professional self-regulation in medicine and other health professions. It reviews the academic literature and sets out an agenda for research. The first section considers definitions, acknowledging the particularly complex regulatory maze in UK health care at present, in which professional self-regulation is only one part. The second section reviews academic writing, currently dispersed among the disciplines. 'The logic of light touch regulation', a feature of the 19th century establishment of the General Medical Council, can perhaps shed light on present debates. Alongside the intense political spotlight on regulation in the wake of the Bristol case, consumer-led research and consumer pressure to rethink the principles of regulation has emerged. This is examined in the third section. nnFinally, themes for research are advanced. First, there is a need to explore the changing relationship between the state and professions and implications, not only for the professions but for health care more broadly. Second, calls for a new professionalism need to be given clearer content. Third, the moves towards more lay involvement in regulatory bodies need study. Fourth, questions of human rights and professional registers must be explored. Fundamental questions of what professional self-regulation can hope to achieve and where it fits in relation to government ambitions as a whole, remain unresolved. Alongside the work programme of the new overarching regulator, there may well be scope for a new style of public enquiry covering the whole territory of regulation.
机译：本文探讨了围绕医学和其他卫生专业专业人员自我调节的最新动向。它审查了学术文献并制定了研究议程。第一部分考虑了定义，承认了目前英国医疗保健中特别复杂的监管迷宫，在这些迷宫中，专业自我监管只是其中一部分。第二部分回顾了目前分散在各个学科中的学术著作。 19世纪通用医务委员会成立的特征是“轻触调节的逻辑”，这也许可以阐明当前的辩论。在布里斯托尔案之后，除了政治上的激烈政治关注外，还出现了消费者主导的研究和消费者重新思考法规原理的压力。第三部分对此进行了研究。 nn最后，研究主题已经发展起来。首先，有必要探索国家与专业之间不断变化的关系及其影响，不仅对于专业，而且对于更广泛的卫生保健。其次，对新职业的呼吁需要给予更清晰的内容。第三，需要更多地介入监管机构。第四，必须探讨人权和专业登记的问题。关于职业自我监管可以​​实现的基本问题以及与政府整体目标相适应的地方，这些基本问题尚未解决。除了新的总体监管者的工作计划外，覆盖整个监管领域的新型公共调查形式也很有可能存在。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号