David Hatch

Bio: David Hatch is an academic researcher from University of London. The author has contributed to research in topics: Competence (human resources) & Peer review. The author has an hindex of 4, co-authored 4 publications receiving 252 citations.

The assessment of poorly performing doctors: the development of the assessment programmes for the General Medical Council's Performance Procedures.

Abstract: Background Modernization of medical regulation has included the introduction of the Professional Performance Procedures by the UK General Medical Council in 1995. The Council now has the power to assess any registered practitioner whose performance may be seriously deficient, thus calling registration (licensure) into question. Problems arising from ill health or conduct are dealt with under separate programmes. Methods This paper describes the development of the assessment programmes within the overall policy framework determined by the Council. Peer review of performance in the workplace (Phase 1) is followed by tests of competence (Phase 2) to reflect the relationship between clinical competence and performance. The theoretical and research basis for the approach are presented, and the relationship between the qualitative methods in Phase 1 and the quantitative methods in Phase 2 explored. Conclusions The approach is feasible, has been implemented and has stood legal challenge. The assessors judge and report all the evidence they collect and may not select from it. All their judgements are included and the voice of the lay assessor is preserved. Taken together, the output from both phases forms an important basis for remediation and training should it be required.

A comparison of sevoflurane to halothane in paediatric surgical patients: Results of a multicentre international study

Abstract: SUMMARY Induction, emergence and recovery characteristics were compared during sevoflurane or halothane anaesthetic in a large (428) multicentre, international study of children undergoing elective inpatient surgical procedures. Two hundred and fourteen children in each group underwent inhalation induction with nitrous oxide/oxygen and sevoflurane or halothane. Incremental doses of either study drug were added until loss of eyelash reflex was achieved. Steady state concentrations of anaesthesia were maintained until the end of surgery when anaesthetic agents were terminated simultaneously. Time variables were recorded for induction, emergence and the first need for analgesia in the recovery room. In addition, in 86 of the children in both groups, venous blood samples were drawn for plasma fluoride levels during and after surgery. There was a trend toward smoother induction (induction of anaesthesia without coughing, breath holding, excitement laryngospasm, bronchospasm, increased secretion, and vomiting) in the sevoflurane group with faster induction (2.1 min vs 2.9 min, P= 0.037) and rapid emergence times (10.3 min vs 13.9 min, P= 0.003). Among the children given sevoflurane, 2% developed bradycardia compared with 11% in the halothane group. Postoperatively, 46% of the children in the halothane group developed nausea and or vomiting versus 31% in the sevoflurane group (P= 0.002). Two children in the halothane group developed cardiac dysrhythmia and were dropped from the study. In addition, a child in the halothane group developed malignant hyperthermia, received dantrolene, and had an uneventful recovery. Mean maximum inorganic fluoride concentration was 18.3 μM˙l−1. The fluoride concentrations peaked within one h of termination of sevoflurane anaesthetic and returned rapidly to baseline within 48 h. This study suggests that sevoflurane may be the drug of choice for the anaesthetic management of children.

The General Medical Council's Performance Procedures: peer review of performance in the workplace.

Abstract: The General Medical Council procedures to assess the performance of doctors who may be seriously deficient include peer review of the doctor's practice at the workplace and tests of competence and skills. Peer reviews are conducted by three trained assessors, two from the same speciality as the doctor being assessed, with one lay assessor. The doctor completes a portfolio to describe his/her training, experience, the circumstances of practice and self rate his/her competence and familiarity in dealing with the common problems of his/her own discipline. The assessment includes a review of the doctor's medical records; discussion of cases selected from these records; observation of consultations for clinicians, or of relevant activities in non-clinicians; a tour of the doctor's workplace; interviews with at least 12 third parties (five nominated by the doctor); and structured interviews with the doctor. The content and structure of the peer review are designed to assess the doctor against the standards defined in Good Medical Practice, as applied to the doctor's speciality. The assessment methods are based on validated instruments and gather 700-1000 judgements on each doctor. Early experience of the peer review visits has confirmed their feasibility and effectiveness.

The pathophysiology of propofol infusion syndrome: a simple name for a complex

Abstract: Propofol infusion syn- drome (PRIS) is a rare and often fa- tal syndrome described in critically ill children undergoing long-term propofol infusion at high doses. Re- cently several cases have been re- ported in adults, too. The main fea- tures of the syndrome consist of car- diac failure, rhabdomyolysis, severe metabolic acidosis and renal failure. To date 21 paediatric cases and 14 adult cases have been described. These latter were mostly patients with acute neurological illnesses or acute inflammatory diseases compli- cated by severe infections or even sepsis, and receiving catecholamines

The pathophysiology of propofol infusion syndrome: a simple name for a complex syndrome

Abstract: Propofol infusion syndrome (PRIS) is a rare and often fatal syndrome described in critically ill children undergoing long-term propofol infusion at high doses. Recently several cases have been reported in adults, too. The main features of the syndrome consist of cardiac failure, rhabdomyolysis, severe metabolic acidosis and renal failure. To date 21 paediatric cases and 14 adult cases have been described. These latter were mostly patients with acute neurological illnesses or acute inflammatory diseases complicated by severe infections or even sepsis, and receiving catecholamines and/or steroids in addition to propofol. Central nervous system activation with production of catecholamines and glucocorticoids, and systemic inflammation with cytokine production are priming factors for cardiac and peripheral muscle dysfunction. High-dose propofol, but also supportive treatments with catecholamines and corticosteroids, act as triggering factors. At the subcellular level, propofol impairs free fatty acid utilisation and mitochondrial activity. Imbalance between energy demand and utilisation is a key pathogenetic mechanism, which may lead to cardiac and peripheral muscle necrosis.

Propofol infusion syndrome.

Abstract: The clinical features of propofol infusion syndrome (PRIS) are acute refractory bradycardia leading to asystole, in the presence of one or more of the following: metabolic acidosis (base deficit > 10 mmol.l(-1)), rhabdomyolysis, hyperlipidaemia, and enlarged or fatty liver. There is an association between PRIS and propofol infusions at doses higher than 4 mg.kg(-1).h(-1) for greater than 48 h duration. Sixty-one patients with PRIS have been recorded in the literature, with deaths in 20 paediatric and 18 adult patients. Seven of these patients (four paediatric and three adult patients) developed PRIS during anaesthesia. It is proposed that the syndrome may be caused by either a direct mitochondrial respiratory chain inhibition or impaired mitochondrial fatty acid metabolism mediated by propofol. An early sign of cardiac instability associated with the syndrome is the development of right bundle branch block with convex-curved ('coved type') ST elevation in the right praecordial leads (V1 to V3) of the electrocardiogram. Predisposing factors include young age, severe critical illness of central nervous system or respiratory origin, exogenous catecholamine or glucocorticoid administration, inadequate carbohydrate intake and subclinical mitochondrial disease. Treatment options are limited. Haemodialysis or haemoperfusion with cardiorespiratory support has been the most successful treatment.

The relationship between competence and performance: implications for assessing practice performance.

Abstract: Objective This paper aims to describe current views of the relationship between competence and performance and to delineate some of the implications of the distinctions between the two areas for the purpose of assessing doctors in practice. Methods During a 2-day closed session, the authors, using their wide experiences in this domain, defined the problem and the context, discussed the content and set up a new model. This was developed further by e-mail correspondence over a 6-month period. Results Competency-based assessments were defined as measures of what doctors do in testing situations, while performance-based assessments were defined as measures of what doctors do in practice. The distinction between competency-based and performance-based methods leads to a three-stage model for assessing doctors in practice. The first component of the model proposed is a screening test that would identify doctors at risk. Practitioners who ‘pass’ the screen would move on to a continuous quality improvement process aimed at raising the general level of performance. Practitioners deemed to be at risk would undergo a more detailed assessment process focused on rigorous testing, with poor performers targeted for remediation or removal from practice. Conclusion We propose a new model, designated the Cambridge Model, which extends and refines Miller's pyramid. It inverts his pyramid, focuses exclusively on the top two tiers, and identifies performance as a product of competence, the influences of the individual (e.g. health, relationships), and the influences of the system (e.g. facilities, practice time). The model provides a basis for understanding and designing assessments of practice performance.

Multisource feedback in the assessment of physician competencies.

Abstract: Multisource feedback (MSF), or 360-degree employee evaluation, is a questionnaire-based assessment method in which rates are evaluated by peers, patients, and coworkers on key performance behaviors. Although widely used in industrial settings to assess performance, the method is gaining acceptance as a quality improvement method in health systems. This article describes MSF, identifies the key aspects of MSF program design, summarizes some of the salient empirical research in medicine, and discusses possible limitations for MSF as an assessment tool in health care. In industry and in health care, experience suggests that MSF is most likely to succeed and result in changes in performance when attention is paid to structural and psychometric aspects of program design and implementation. A carefully selected steering committee ensures that the behaviors examined are appropriate, the communication package is clear, and the threats posed to individuals are minimized. The instruments that are developed must be tested to ensure that they are reliable, achieve a generalizability coefficient of Ep2 = .70, have face and content validity, and examine variance in performance ratings to understand whether ratings are attributable to how the physician performs and not to factors beyond the physician's control (e.g., gender, age, or setting). Research shows that reliable data can be generated with a reasonable number of respondents, and physicians will use the feedback to contemplate and initiate changes in practice. Performance may be affected by familiarity between rater and ratee and sociodemographic and continuing medical education characteristics; however, little of the variance in performance is explained by factors outside the physician's control. MSF is not a replacement for audit when clinical outcomes need to be assessed. However, when interpersonal, communication, professionalism, or teamwork behaviors need to be assessed and guidance given, it is one of the better tools that may be adopted and implemented to provide feedback and guide performance.