This site is intended for health professionals only


RCGP’s new revalidation guidance aims to ‘reduce administrative workload’



The RCGP has published new guidance on revalidation which aims to ‘reduce administrative workload’ and ‘emphasises quality not quantity of documentation’.

The new guidance clarifies the GMC definition of a significant event but, as already reported in Pulse, the main change to the guidance is to end the doubling of CPD points for demonstrating ‘impact’.

While revalidation falls under the GMC’s remit, the RCGP’s guidance aims to support GPs through the process.

According to the RCGP, the new system ‘equates one CPD credit to one hour of learning activity, verified by a reflective note on lessons learned and changes made. There is no expectation that this reflection is carried out for all learning, just the most significant and best examples’.

It also provides guidance on what constitutes a significant event.

The RCGP says: ’Most primary care trigger incidents (both positive and negative) that are used by GPs in significant event analysis processes… do not reach the GMC threshold of harm and should not be declared as significant events, but included as quality improvement activities.’

The RCGP has published the new guidance after its 2015 revalidation survey found that more than a third of the 1000 GP respondents had difficulties with revalidation, finding it time-consuming and bureaucratic.

Dr Susi Caesar, RCGP lead for revalidation, said: ‘It is obvious from the survey results that members were finding the process burdensome at a time when they are already under intense resource and workforce pressures.

‘We hope the latest version of our guidance will help to increase the dissemination of best practice while reducing the burden of documentation required. The changes that have been made to our guidance on supporting information focus on reducing confusion, reducing bureaucracy, and ultimately reducing workload for GPs when they are under such intense pressure with increasing patient demand.’

The GMC itself is reviewing its revalidation procedure, and will make recommendations next year, with an independent review publishing its interim findings this spring.