SLP Sparks

The big picture:

On 5 November 2024, we got our hands on a copy of the long-awaited 219-page Final Report from the Unleashing the Potential of our Health Workforce – Scope of Practice Review into health professional scope of practice in primary care, including for speech pathologists (SLPs). 

Context: 

• SLPs are self-regulated. We operate outside the National Registration and Accreditation Scheme (NRAS), which means:
  • we don’t have protected title; and 
  • are not regulated by the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA), unlike some other allied health professionals, like occupational therapists and physiotherapists. 
• Under current rules, health professions need to demonstrate that they pose a ‘significant risk of harm to the health and safety of the public’ before they can be regulated under NRAS.  
• To date, SLPs have not satisfied this test. 

Why it matters: 

• The Independent Reviewers, led by Professor Mark Cormack, made 18 recommendations.
• Recommendation 8 is relevant to SLPs. In summary, the Reviewers recommended that the “regulatory model for professions operating outside of the NRAS [including for SLPs] be strengthened and standardised” (p16). 

Zoom in:

Recommendation 8 of the Review is that the “Health Ministers’ Meeting (HMM) agree to strengthen and standardise the regulatory model for health professions currently operating outside of the [NRAS] to:

•  enable the community to access and benefit from all health professionals working to their full scope of practice in multidisciplinary teams in primary care
•  ensure safety and quality of care delivered by the self-regulated health professions.”

3 options:

The Reviewers recommended that HMM commission a rapid impact analysis of the three reform options:

• Option A – targeted legislative amendments to introduce a pathway into NRAS by introducing an additional criterion, such as a ‘public interest’ criterion, to the NRAS criteria for regulatory assessment of the need for statutory registration of a health profession
• Option B – amended definition of a ‘health profession’ by amending the National Law to include additional specified professions in the definition of a ‘health profession’
• Option C – accreditation by AHPRA (or another body) of relevant professional bodies to perform consistent, quality self-regulation functions for professions which are not registered in the NRAS (page 32, our emphasis).

Driving the proposed change:

Recommendation 8 is designed to:

• improve access to care delivered by self-regulated health professions, including SLPs;
• increase public confidence in the scope of practice of self-regulated professions; and
• improve interprofessional understanding and inclusion of self-regulated health professionals in multidisciplinary team-based care, so that we can work to our full scope of practice (page 33).

Things to watch for: 

• Health care reform is complex and requires system-wide commitment from state and Federal governments. 
• We must:
  • await the Health Ministers’ response(s) to Recommendation 8 to see whether they support any of its options for SLP regulatory reforms;
  • hope that any reforms are coordinated with NDIS registration reforms to avoid unnecessary red tape or compliance costs while enhancing service quality and protecting participants and the public.    

Go deeper:

Unleashing the Potential of our Health Workforce – Scope of Practice Review Final Report