Research finds support for targeted remediation to improve patient safety

We have today published new research exploring how remediation could be used earlier in the Fitness to Practise (FtP) process.  

We have been exploring remediation as an approach to addressing potential FtP issues before a case is referred to case examiners, to support learning, improve patient safety, and reduce the negative impacts of lengthy investigations on dental professionals. 

The study, conducted by a collaborative research team from the University of Manchester, Newcastle University, the University of Nottingham and Queen Mary University of London, found that there was broad support for tailored and targeted remediation as part of the FtP process, but acknowledged that there may be varying views on the acceptability of remediation as an outcome of an investigation.  

The research was conducted to understand views, approaches and potential obstacles to remediation in healthcare regulation and to inform our thinking on how we might manage less serious public safety and confidence risks more effectively and earlier in the process. 

Currently, only a small proportion of cases raised with us are so serious that they require sanctions or restrictions on registration. In most cases, there could be opportunities for earlier interventions focused on remediation, empathy and learning, through which we could reduce the punitive effect of the FtP process.

There was a common view that remediation could support improvements in patient safety and the quality of care. It was widely accepted that some issues were so serious that they were irremediable. 

Stefan Czerniawski. Executive Director of Strategy at the GDC, said: "We know that fitness to practise investigations can be long drawn out and feel overly complex in relation to the issues raised, often leading to feelings of mistrust in and fear of the process among registrants. We need to think differently if we want that to change." 

“We’re using these research findings to inform our thinking on whether early evidence of remediation can play a greater role in the fitness to practise process and lead to more proportionate outcomes in some cases.” 

The researchers identified the adversarial nature of the process and lack of trust in the regulator as two of the key barriers to effective implementation of remediation. Addressing these issues would require a greater risk tolerance and the creation of a more supportive regulatory environment that encouraged registrants to remediate early. 

Consideration will also need to be given to whether changes to legislation would be needed to make the most effective use of remediation in the resolution of FtP cases. 

The findings highlighted the need for the regulator to develop clear guidance, and for remediation to be specific to any deficiencies identified to be effective and meaningful.   

As set out in our proposed Corporate Strategy for 2026-2028, open for consultation until 21 August, we are aiming to shift towards a more prevention-focused regulatory model that protects the public and prioritises learning and development to mitigate risk.