Patterns of unprofessional conduct by medical practitioners in South Africa (2007–2013)

A role of ethics in the medical context is to protect the interests, freedoms and well-being of patients. A critical analysis of unprofessional conduct by medical practitioners registered with the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) requires a better understanding of the specific ethi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Willem A. Hoffmann, Nico Nortjé
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: AOSIS 2016-05-01
Series:South African Family Practice
Subjects:
Online Access:https://safpj.co.za/index.php/safpj/article/view/5668
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849234246545178624
author Willem A. Hoffmann
Nico Nortjé
author_facet Willem A. Hoffmann
Nico Nortjé
author_sort Willem A. Hoffmann
collection DOAJ
description A role of ethics in the medical context is to protect the interests, freedoms and well-being of patients. A critical analysis of unprofessional conduct by medical practitioners registered with the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) requires a better understanding of the specific ethics misconduct trends. To investigate the objectives the case content and sanctions of all guilty decisions related to unprofessional conduct against HPCSA-registered medical practitioners in the period 2007 to 2013 were analysed. A mixed methods approach was followed. The quantitative component focused on annual frequency data regarding the number of decisions taken against practitioners, number of practitioners, number of specific sanctions and categories. Relatively few medical practitioners (between 0.11% and 0.24%) are annually found guilty of unprofessional conduct. The annual average number of guilty decisions per guilty medical practitioner ranged between 1.29 and 2.58. The three most frequent sanctions imposed were fines between ZAR10 000 and ZAR15 000 (28.29%), fines between ZAR1 000 and ZAR8 000 (23.47%) and suspended suspensions between 1 month and 1 year (17.37%). The majority of the unprofessional conduct involved fraudulent behaviour (48.4%), followed by negligence or incompetence in evaluating, treating or caring for patients (29%). Unethical behaviour by medical practitioners in South Africa occurs relatively infrequently.
format Article
id doaj-art-afec6d4182eb4b9e8edbc7824295526d
institution Kabale University
issn 2078-6190
2078-6204
language English
publishDate 2016-05-01
publisher AOSIS
record_format Article
series South African Family Practice
spelling doaj-art-afec6d4182eb4b9e8edbc7824295526d2025-08-20T04:03:12ZengAOSISSouth African Family Practice2078-61902078-62042016-05-0158310.4102/safp.v58i3.56684279Patterns of unprofessional conduct by medical practitioners in South Africa (2007–2013)Willem A. Hoffmann0Nico Nortjé1Department of Biomedical Sciences, Tshwane University of Technology, PretoriaDepartment of Psychology, University of the Free State, BloemfonteinA role of ethics in the medical context is to protect the interests, freedoms and well-being of patients. A critical analysis of unprofessional conduct by medical practitioners registered with the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) requires a better understanding of the specific ethics misconduct trends. To investigate the objectives the case content and sanctions of all guilty decisions related to unprofessional conduct against HPCSA-registered medical practitioners in the period 2007 to 2013 were analysed. A mixed methods approach was followed. The quantitative component focused on annual frequency data regarding the number of decisions taken against practitioners, number of practitioners, number of specific sanctions and categories. Relatively few medical practitioners (between 0.11% and 0.24%) are annually found guilty of unprofessional conduct. The annual average number of guilty decisions per guilty medical practitioner ranged between 1.29 and 2.58. The three most frequent sanctions imposed were fines between ZAR10 000 and ZAR15 000 (28.29%), fines between ZAR1 000 and ZAR8 000 (23.47%) and suspended suspensions between 1 month and 1 year (17.37%). The majority of the unprofessional conduct involved fraudulent behaviour (48.4%), followed by negligence or incompetence in evaluating, treating or caring for patients (29%). Unethical behaviour by medical practitioners in South Africa occurs relatively infrequently.https://safpj.co.za/index.php/safpj/article/view/5668ethical transgressionsfraudhpcsaincompetencenegligence
spellingShingle Willem A. Hoffmann
Nico Nortjé
Patterns of unprofessional conduct by medical practitioners in South Africa (2007–2013)
South African Family Practice
ethical transgressions
fraud
hpcsa
incompetence
negligence
title Patterns of unprofessional conduct by medical practitioners in South Africa (2007–2013)
title_full Patterns of unprofessional conduct by medical practitioners in South Africa (2007–2013)
title_fullStr Patterns of unprofessional conduct by medical practitioners in South Africa (2007–2013)
title_full_unstemmed Patterns of unprofessional conduct by medical practitioners in South Africa (2007–2013)
title_short Patterns of unprofessional conduct by medical practitioners in South Africa (2007–2013)
title_sort patterns of unprofessional conduct by medical practitioners in south africa 2007 2013
topic ethical transgressions
fraud
hpcsa
incompetence
negligence
url https://safpj.co.za/index.php/safpj/article/view/5668
work_keys_str_mv AT willemahoffmann patternsofunprofessionalconductbymedicalpractitionersinsouthafrica20072013
AT niconortje patternsofunprofessionalconductbymedicalpractitionersinsouthafrica20072013