The surgeon’s college must confront its fear of new acronyms after orthopaedic surgeons threaten to form new body.
It’s looking like breakup season in the health sector, with orthopaedic surgeons proposing the creation of their own independent college.
The Royal Australasian College of Surgeons (RACS) has opposed the proposal, urging its members to vote against the creation of the Australia New Zealand College of Orthopaedic Surgeons (ANZCOS).
Concerns have been expressed by the RACS that the split would “alter the structure of surgical training in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand, with significant implications for Trainees, Fellows, health systems and the community”.
The Australian Orthopaedic Association has asked its members in a plebiscite if independent Australian Medical Council accreditation was desirable.
Reducing training costs was raised as a factor in the push to split, along with the AOA looking to establish more direct engagement with the regulator and limit the duplication of services.
The RACS has taken offence to the proposal, saying that it attempts to minimise the significance of RACS and its national brand value.
RACS has also argued that it demonstrates a “fundamental misreading” of how surgical systems function in Australia and New Zealand.
“Introducing a new, unproven post-nominal from a newly established organisation lacks this foundation,” RACS said in a media release.
“It risks public confusion, weakens professional recognition, and undermines the collective authority surgeons have built over generations.
“A single, unified framework underpins patient safety, Trainee confidence, workforce mobility and international credibility.
“FRACS is the unifying symbol of trust for patients, employers and regulators, and that is why RACS will continue to offer FRACS to surgeons who train through an accredited RACS pathway.”
Related
In the AOA proposal, training would still be delivered by the AOA and NZOA, as it is now, with the same operational layers remaining.
This would mean that the aforementioned issues with training would still remain, with the only change being the name of the overarching organisation, per RACS media.
Financial modelling for the split has not been confirmed at time of publication meaning that comparison of costs between the proposal and current management is unavailable.
“The plebiscite’s purpose is to inform the Board the preferences of the membership,” AOA president Dr Mark Moroney told The Medical Republic.
“The AOA Board will make an informed decision based on those results.
“The function, purpose and name of AOA will not change under direct accreditation.”
Whilst the plebiscite is still in its early days, the AOA has maintained that the proposal is to act as a gauge for membership preference.
RACS has argued that a “unified surgical college” is the best approach on the basis that it provides stronger professional leverage, coordinated advocacy and integrated workforce planning across specialties.
A modernised faculty-based model has been proposed by RACS in response, which would address orthopaedic concerns of speciality leadership and training costs while still remaining as a unified college.
“The profession is strongest when it is united,” RACS said.
“RACS encourages all members to carefully consider the implications of the proposed split and engage with RACS on the faculty-based alternative.”
