Regulatory frameworks in plastic and cosmetic surgery: a comparative scoping review across Australia, United Kingdom, and Italy.

Regulatory framework clinical governance management

Journal

Gland surgery
ISSN: 2227-684X
Titre abrégé: Gland Surg
Pays: China (Republic : 1949- )
ID NLM: 101606638

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
31 Aug 2024
Historique:
received: 17 06 2024
accepted: 15 08 2024
medline: 17 9 2024
pubmed: 17 9 2024
entrez: 16 9 2024
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The regulatory landscape for plastic and cosmetic surgery across the country plays a crucial role in shaping the practices within its premises, ensuring patient safety, and maintaining ethical standards in the medical community. This review examines the distinct regulatory frameworks that govern Australia, United Kingdom (UK), and Italy practices, focusing on the nuances that influence the professional accountability and safety measures in place. A comprehensive scoping review was conducted, exploring the legal and regulatory frameworks governing plastic and reconstructive surgery in Australia, the UK, and Italy. Databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant studies from infinity to May 2024, which were then analyzed to compare regulatory practices, qualification requirements, and their implications on patient safety and professional accountability. Each country presents a unique set of regulations that reflect their individual medical, legal, and cultural contexts. In Australia, the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) and the Medical Board of Australia impose stringent criteria for differentiating between "cosmetic surgeons" and "plastic surgeons". The UK's approach, governed by the General Medical Council (GMC), emphasizes ethical conduct, informed consent, and transparent advertising. Italy's regulatory framework varies slightly with a specific focus on the qualifications and titles of practitioners. The study underscores the importance of stringent regulations in plastic and cosmetic surgery, advocating for enhanced regulatory measures and comprehensive education on the qualifications of practitioners. It is imperative that these standards are maintained and adapted as necessary to protect patients in the rapidly evolving landscape of cosmetic and plastic surgery across the different regions.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
The regulatory landscape for plastic and cosmetic surgery across the country plays a crucial role in shaping the practices within its premises, ensuring patient safety, and maintaining ethical standards in the medical community. This review examines the distinct regulatory frameworks that govern Australia, United Kingdom (UK), and Italy practices, focusing on the nuances that influence the professional accountability and safety measures in place.
Methods UNASSIGNED
A comprehensive scoping review was conducted, exploring the legal and regulatory frameworks governing plastic and reconstructive surgery in Australia, the UK, and Italy. Databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant studies from infinity to May 2024, which were then analyzed to compare regulatory practices, qualification requirements, and their implications on patient safety and professional accountability.
Results UNASSIGNED
Each country presents a unique set of regulations that reflect their individual medical, legal, and cultural contexts. In Australia, the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) and the Medical Board of Australia impose stringent criteria for differentiating between "cosmetic surgeons" and "plastic surgeons". The UK's approach, governed by the General Medical Council (GMC), emphasizes ethical conduct, informed consent, and transparent advertising. Italy's regulatory framework varies slightly with a specific focus on the qualifications and titles of practitioners.
Conclusions UNASSIGNED
The study underscores the importance of stringent regulations in plastic and cosmetic surgery, advocating for enhanced regulatory measures and comprehensive education on the qualifications of practitioners. It is imperative that these standards are maintained and adapted as necessary to protect patients in the rapidly evolving landscape of cosmetic and plastic surgery across the different regions.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39282026
doi: 10.21037/gs-24-244
pii: gs-13-08-1561
pmc: PMC11399018
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Pagination

1561-1572

Informations de copyright

2024 Gland Surgery. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://gs.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/gs-24-244/coif). W.M.R. serves as an unpaid associate editor of Gland Surgery from March 2023 to February 2028. I.S. serves as an unpaid editorial board member of Gland Surgery from September 2023 to August 2025. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Auteurs

Bryan Lim (B)

Department of Plastic Surgery, Peninsula Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Ishith Seth (I)

Department of Plastic Surgery, Peninsula Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Gianluca Marcaccini (G)

Unit of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.

Pietro Susini (P)

Unit of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.

Roberto Cuomo (R)

Department of Plastic Surgery, Peninsula Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Unit of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.

Warren M Rozen (WM)

Department of Plastic Surgery, Peninsula Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Classifications MeSH