- 8.1. Myth: GMC Significant Events are the same as GP significant events
- 8.2. Myth: I must include two significant events every year
8.1. Myth: GMC Significant Events are the same as GP significant events
The GMC definition of a significant event is not the same as that commonly used in primary care. The GMC says:
‘A significant event (also known as an untoward or critical incident) is any unintended or unexpected event, which could or did lead to harm of one or more patients. This includes incidents which did not cause harm but could have done, or where the event should have been prevented.’2
The GMC requires you to declare and reflect on those significant events in which you have been personally named or involved and in which a patient or patients could have or did come to harm in the Significant Event section of the portfolio. This means that significant events that meet the GMC threshold of harm must be included and reflected on at your appraisal.
There is no limit to the number of such significant events that you must include. However, if you have had no significant events that meet the GMC threshold of harm, you should declare that in the relevant sign-off statement.
We recommend that you do not use the Significant Event section of your portfolio to record GP significant events. These are essentially any event, positive or negative, that has triggered a learning process for you or your team. They should be reflected on and included as quality improvement activities, where you are demonstrating your learning from events in your scope of practice.
8.2. Myth: I must include two significant events every year
There is a very wide range of possible types of quality improvement activity (QIA) that can be used to demonstrate review of work, not just significant event analysis.
We previously recommended that GPs should include two detailed case reviews or significant event analyses every year as an easy way to demonstrate review of work. This was sometimes misinterpreted as a requirement, rather than a recommendation. While significant event analysis is still an entirely acceptable way of demonstrating review of practice, our current recommendation is that there are many other types of QIA that may be included as supporting information.
In some areas, such as Northern Ireland and Scotland, the appraisal policy (and the electronic platform) still includes a requirement to include two significant event analyses. These should be seen as quality improvement activities, not as implying that GPs in these areas have more significant events that reach the GMC level of harm than GPs elsewhere. We recommend that you ensure you are aware of the requirements of your local appraisal policy in this area.
All GPs must ensure that they include all significant events that do reach the GMC threshold of harm. The GMC says:
‘A significant event (also known as an untoward or critical incident) is any unintended or unexpected event, which could or did lead to harm of one or more patients. This includes incidents which did not cause harm but could have done, or where the event should have been prevented.’3
2 General Medical Council (March 2012), Supporting information for appraisal and revalidation, 9
3 General Medical Council (March 2012), Supporting information for appraisal and revalidation, 9