|
Microsystems Acupuncture Regulatory Working Group
Meeting Friday 12th November, 2010, 12.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m.
At
University of London
Senate house, room 102
London WC1 7HU
Attending
Jennie Longbottom, Chair. (JL)
Paul Blacker, Ear Acupuncture Register, Secretary, minutes (PB)
Jonathan Tarr, British College of auricular acupuncture (JT)
Maria Mercati, Acupuncture -Acutherapy (MM)
Pauline Ronson, Society of Auricular Acupuncturists, treasurer (PR)
Dragomir Luborimov, The Acupuncture Society (DL)
Amanda Shayle, The Acupuncture Society (AS)
Anne Marshall, Acu-Detox Plus UK (AM)
John Gavin, College of Naturopathic Medicine (JG)
Samantha Terry, Sustainable Health (ST)
Charlotte Sugden, Sustainable Health (CS)
Invited Visitor
Mark Bovey ARRC, (MB)
Observing
Ewan Urquhart, Oxford Medical Supplies. (EU)
Apologies / not in attendance
Wan-Hye Park, Korean Hand Acupuncture (WHP)
Carole Bishop, Acupuncture Consultancy & Training (CB)
Derry Jones, Jing Traditional Medicine (DJ)
Janine Cousins, Acupuncture Consultancy & Training (JC)
Ken Andrews, EFMA (KA)
Richard Irwin, Addaction. (RI)
AGENDA
Action
Welcome and apologies
Previous meetings minutes.
Agreed as accurate, and signed by the chair.
1. Research with MB, ARRC
MB outlined the BAAB to the group. He outlined that there is more
available research currently available on ear acupuncture then scalp
acupuncture, and less on other systems including the term
Microsystems of acupuncture.
MB outlined research in the profession of acupuncture, and that the
future might bring about the need to research the different areas of
acupuncture i.e. Microsystems or traditional.
MB said there was a need to have research mindedness within the
profession Research should be safety effectiveness and cost
effectiveness, and accepted by the people who have it and that it
encourages self care in the long term.
MB outlined the difference between research and audit to the group, and
the role of profession to have an awareness about both. MYMOP was
discussed as a useful clinical tool for the future as a good starting point.
JL to send the group links to research tools.
MB outlined the 2 surveys that had been undertaken, practitioner and
patient surveys, by Hugh McPherson. MB said that the sample size
should be large to ensure that it covers most unusual events that might
occur. MB said that 12.5 thousand pounds per survey would be an
indication of costs to undertake such a survey. He said that a safety
study was an affordable piece of research to undertake.
JL suggested that there needs to be a broad definition on Microsystems
in relation to research and Microsystems.
MB outlined single case studies and their benefits.
PB suggested using MYMOP as a piece of research for the profession.
JL to action to the
group.
JL to action
PB to circulate
MYMOP to the
group.
2. Profession Specific Board for the CNHC
PB discussed the PSB and the need to undertake a postal vote for the
formation of the proposed route to formation and that by virtue of the
organizations informing their members over the last year has not led to
any formal dissension.
JT proposed to set up a profession specific board (PSB) seconded by
JG, voted for unanimously. JL outlined the responsibilities of the PSB.
The 4 members proposed and voted for by the group are;
• PB
• AS
• JT
• JG
PB had been asked that the register open for registrants on the 31st or
the 1st of January. PB to aske the CNHC for clarification of the next
processes. PB proposed that the register open with the CNHC. PB to
discuss with CNHC possible dates.
PB to action
3. Final document.
PB to delete references to MAC and post document on website Pb to send to
web master
4. Constitution documents of the MAC
To be discussed at a later date.
5. MAC terms of ref document
To be discussed at a later date.
6. MAC membership of committee document
To be discussed at a later date.
7. MAC declaration of interest document
To be discussed at a later date.
8. MAC framework document
To be discussed at a later date.
9. Due processes of MAC
To be discussed at a later date.
10. Funding for the running of the MAC
To be discussed at a later date.
11. Local Authority recognition
JT raised the question of Local authority recognition of courses in
London and discussion followed.
12. Finances
PR updated the group on the finances of the group. PR outlined the
possible cost to run a proposed MAC, and that this may be 20,000 per
year. PR noted that other professions appear to have not created a
single council that has been proposed by the group. JT observed that
he had strong misgivings in one pa holding and running its own register
and that there is a conflict of interest especially if complaints are made
to a small group. PR proposed that the MAC be put on hold for the time
being and discussed, in six months time, seconded by DL voted for by
majority, 1 abstention.
JL proposed that another meeting could be run voluntarily to complete
any necessary paperwork.
PR observed that other PAʼs charge 57 - 80 for membership of the
PA.
13. AOB - NOS of MAC.
10th of December 2010 Paul to be talking to SFH. PB to update the
group after the meeting with any new information.
14. Education meeting at BAcC conference.
PB outlined the discussions that occurred at the ASG meeting at the
BAcC conference. PB mentioned that there were discussions about
scope of practice, PB to produce a discussion document on the scope of
practice.
PB to find out who the document would be circulated to via the ASG and
will circulate
PB to produce
15. Update on stakeholder groups and NADA
PB outlined the update NADAs situation as described by him by RP.
Currently it is as it has been before. PB offered that he would attend the
next NADA meeting if required.
Next meeting TBA
|
