Transforming and Supporting Patient Care - Health Professions ...

117Chapter 5 – Scope of Practice of Medical Laboratory TechnologyThe foreign jurisdictions surveyed, Australia, New Zealand and GreatBritain, take a different approach to regulation of MLTs.The first marked difference from Ontario can be noted from the titles used.In Australia, MLTs are called medical laboratory scientists. In New Zealand,the regulatory body governs both MLTs and MLA/Ts; and they are called,respectively, medical laboratory scientists and medical laboratorytechnicians. In Great Britain, MLTs are called biomedical scientists. Theywere formerly called medical laboratory technicians, but correspond toOntario’s technologists as opposed to technicians/assistants.A further contrast with Ontario’s regulatory regime stems from the absenceof specific authorized or restricted activities. No such acts are set out in theQueensland or South Australia jurisdictions. In New Zealand, restrictedactivities exist but none pertain to MLTs. Likewise, no restricted activitieshave been set out for MLTs in Great Britain.The level of regulation also differs in these jurisdictions. There is nostatutory registration for medical laboratory scientists in any jurisdiction inAustralia. However, some employers do require eligibility for professionalmembership in the Australian Institute for Medical Scientists (AIMS) foremployment.Perspectives from the ConsultationsHPRAC’s consultations were designed to gain additional information on theproposed changes to the scope of practice of MLTs as well as stakeholders’perspectives on the benefits and risks associated with the proposedchanges.At the beginning of the consultations, meetings were held with theproponents to review their joint submission, gain a better understanding ofthe role that MLTs play in the provincial health system and understand therationale for and implications of the proposals.HPRAC received comments and information, either through writtensubmissions from individuals and various organizations, or throughconsultative meetings held with key individuals and organizations.Six written responses were submitted: from Dietitians of Canada, theOntario Association of Medical Laboratories, the Ontario HospitalAssociation, the Ontario Medical Association, the Ontario Society of ClinicalChemists and the College of Respiratory Therapists of Ontario. Thesubmissions indicated support for some of the proposed changes, thoughmost raised significant concerns with some of the proposals. HPRAC hasconsidered these responses in its analysis and recommendations. All of thesubmissions are available on HPRAC’s website.Meetings were held with representatives of the Laboratories Branch of theMinistry of Health and Long-Term Care, as well as the QMP-LS, to discuss theorganization of laboratory services in Ontario and obtain their perspectiveson the proposed changes. Sessions also took place with educators on theHPRAC Critical Links January 2009