|
How do we measure the effectiveness of chiropractic regulation?2021 Forum: 19 / 20 November (Friday or Saturday) |
This was the topic at the recent 90-minute mini forum hosted by the International Chiropractic Regulatory Society.
The Zoom session was moderated by Dr Wayne Minter, who chairs both the ICRS and his national regulatory authority, the Chiropractic Board of Australia.
Guest presenters were Mr Nick Jones, Chief Executive and Registrar of the United Kingdom's General Chiropractic Council, and Dr Philippe Larivière, Chair of the Federation of Canadian Chiropractic.
While acknowledging the importance of such measuring benchmarks as the speed of processing applications for licensure or registration, frequency of reporting violations, inclusion of stakeholders, financial management, and regulatory responsiveness to social justice concerns, the presenters concluded that the issue is far more complex.
Both agreed that transparency and fairness are paramount characteristics of effective regulatory authorities. It can be challenging to maintain the dual aspects of being a solid, consistent agency and one that is nimble and responsive to unplanned events such as the pandemic or media reports regarding registrants.
Jones observed that there are always "regulators that regulate the regulators." He emphasized the importance of understanding the accountability necessary both up and down the chain of authority.
Sometimes those who request information and accountability are unclear what they really need or want, which requires diplomacy as well as vast storehouses of information. The need to be prepared for quick reporting and increasing demands for transparency have resulted in greatly enhanced data collection and analysis, something that both presenters agreed is a positive step in the evolution of regulation.
Larivière stressed that a single analysis of a system component is never sufficient. Rather, the tools themselves must be continually reviewed and refined, while still maintaining enough core consistency to discern trends over time.
Requirements must also continually adapt, as noted by the new graduates who are much more mobile than registrants years ago. They want to experience different countries, resulting in the need for more flexibility in the licensure / registration process for treating athletes, teaching, helping during disasters, or more permanent relocation when new practice opportunities arise.
Mobility issues alone give rise to the need to explore greater standardization in education, accreditation, testing, and registration. This naturally circles back to the age-old discussion of "what is chiropractic" and is it substantially similar throughout the world? In order to protect the public interest (the key principle undergirding regulation), do we need more similar wording in regulatory requirements? How do we best respect the unique aspects of different cultures while pursuing a more shared vision?
Both noted that regulators have to be both tough and steady about fair and consistent enforcement while also being flexible and compassionate. Additionally, effective regulation requires the ability to anticipate future needs and modify systems now to meet demands as yet undefined.
The team concurred that there are no simple metrics that define effective chiropractic regulation. Rather, it is an ever-evolving process. Willingness to assess and continually reassess the many gears in the regulatory machine are the best predictors of regulatory effectiveness.
Zoom-based ICRS Forums are open to all at no charge. To join the mailing list or for more information about international regulation, please visit www.chiroregulation.org.
The Zoom session was moderated by Dr Wayne Minter, who chairs both the ICRS and his national regulatory authority, the Chiropractic Board of Australia.
Guest presenters were Mr Nick Jones, Chief Executive and Registrar of the United Kingdom's General Chiropractic Council, and Dr Philippe Larivière, Chair of the Federation of Canadian Chiropractic.
While acknowledging the importance of such measuring benchmarks as the speed of processing applications for licensure or registration, frequency of reporting violations, inclusion of stakeholders, financial management, and regulatory responsiveness to social justice concerns, the presenters concluded that the issue is far more complex.
Both agreed that transparency and fairness are paramount characteristics of effective regulatory authorities. It can be challenging to maintain the dual aspects of being a solid, consistent agency and one that is nimble and responsive to unplanned events such as the pandemic or media reports regarding registrants.
Jones observed that there are always "regulators that regulate the regulators." He emphasized the importance of understanding the accountability necessary both up and down the chain of authority.
Sometimes those who request information and accountability are unclear what they really need or want, which requires diplomacy as well as vast storehouses of information. The need to be prepared for quick reporting and increasing demands for transparency have resulted in greatly enhanced data collection and analysis, something that both presenters agreed is a positive step in the evolution of regulation.
Larivière stressed that a single analysis of a system component is never sufficient. Rather, the tools themselves must be continually reviewed and refined, while still maintaining enough core consistency to discern trends over time.
Requirements must also continually adapt, as noted by the new graduates who are much more mobile than registrants years ago. They want to experience different countries, resulting in the need for more flexibility in the licensure / registration process for treating athletes, teaching, helping during disasters, or more permanent relocation when new practice opportunities arise.
Mobility issues alone give rise to the need to explore greater standardization in education, accreditation, testing, and registration. This naturally circles back to the age-old discussion of "what is chiropractic" and is it substantially similar throughout the world? In order to protect the public interest (the key principle undergirding regulation), do we need more similar wording in regulatory requirements? How do we best respect the unique aspects of different cultures while pursuing a more shared vision?
Both noted that regulators have to be both tough and steady about fair and consistent enforcement while also being flexible and compassionate. Additionally, effective regulation requires the ability to anticipate future needs and modify systems now to meet demands as yet undefined.
The team concurred that there are no simple metrics that define effective chiropractic regulation. Rather, it is an ever-evolving process. Willingness to assess and continually reassess the many gears in the regulatory machine are the best predictors of regulatory effectiveness.
Zoom-based ICRS Forums are open to all at no charge. To join the mailing list or for more information about international regulation, please visit www.chiroregulation.org.
PRESENTERS
- Mr Nick Jones, Chief Executive and Registrar - General Chiropractic Council (UK) CLICK HERE FOR PRESENTATION
- Dr Philippe Larivière, Chair - Federation of Canadian Chiropractic CLICK HERE FOR PRESENTATION
