News
RACGP updates practice accreditation guidance
The interpretive guide reinforces what is new for accreditation processes, accommodating a wider range of general practice models.
The definition of a general practice for the purpose of accreditation was updated in 2024 to capture non-traditional general practices previously excluded from accreditation.
The RACGP has updated an interpretive guide to help GPs and non-traditional practices better understand their eligibility against the definition of general practice for the purpose of accreditation.
Updated in April 2024 to reflect the broadened eligibility for non-traditional general practice models and support equitable access to accreditation, the definition accommodates a wider range of service delivery models, while the core components of comprehensive, whole-person, GP-led care remain unchanged.
As more non-traditional general practices seek accreditation, the college’s revision of the Interpretive guide for non-traditional general practices for the purposes of accreditation provides information to practices and accreditation agencies about what has changed and what remains the same.
It also stipulates that any care provided must remain comprehensive and continuous regardless of the patient cohort or service delivery model.
As well as addressing common questions received from accrediting agencies and practices, the updated interpretive guide provides further clarification on the application of the current definition, and continues to support the application of the Standards for general practices (5th edition) during the current accreditation transition period.
The RACGP defines ‘non-traditional’ practices as service models that do not conform to the conventions historically applied to practices with a fixed, physical ‘bricks-and-mortar’ general practice.
Providing general practice care to targeted populations, these practices often deliver care in innovative ways while still providing comprehensive, patient-centred, whole-person, and continuous care. Examples include residential aged care facilities, mobile outreach disability care, or health services operating in rural, remote or Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community settings.
Dr Louise Acland, Chair of the RACGP Expert Committee – Standards for General Practices, told newsGP the updated guide provides a description of the application of relevant 5th edition indicators to non-traditional practices.
‘The definition of a general practice for the purpose of accreditation was updated to capture non-traditional general practices previously excluded from accreditation,’ she said.
‘Regardless of the patient cohort or service delivery model, the care provided must remain comprehensive and continuous.
‘As such, services that provide limited and/or non-continuous care are not eligible for accreditation.’
The entity seeking accreditation must be able to demonstrate that it operates as an independent general practice and meets the Standards in its own right, Dr Acland adds.
‘It cannot rely on another organisation’s accreditation, governance arrangements or systems to demonstrate compliance with the Standards,’ she said.
Final determination of eligibility rests with the accreditation agency under the Scheme.
The requirement that care is GP-led is central to the definition, the RACGP highlights, and the updated definition has not altered the requirements or the fundamental nature of general practice of providing comprehensive, whole-person care, with scope of care ‘remaining critical’ to eligibility.
The differences between the previous and new definitions are that an eligible general practice:
- can provide care to a specific patient cohort, if care is comprehensive
- is not required to have a fixed, physical location.
The 6th edition Standards is
currently underway and due for release this year.
Log in below to join the conversation.
definition of general practice general practice accreditation interpretive guide non-traditional general practices Standards for general practices
newsGP weekly poll
To what extent do current digital health systems impact administrative workload in your practice?