ODOB notification · Written to Standards of Ethical Conduct

Professionalism and Professional Standards for Optometrists and Dispensing Opticians for Optometrists and Dispensing Opticians facing an ODOB investigation, complaint or allegation

The allegation concerns your professionalism, behaviour or conduct as an optometrist or a dispensing optician.

Referral — a field defect or a detachment referred too late
Sales — a patient frightened into a second pair
Certificates — an eyesight certificate signed without the fields
Boundaries — a boundaries breach with a patient or a colleague
Records — notes that don’t record what was examined, or why
Registration — practising without a current practising certificate
Co-operation — not responding to the Board or its Committee
Any other — professional concern or allegation of unprofessional conduct

Facing an allegation of unprofessional behaviour or misconduct like these — from the ODOB, a Professional Conduct Committee or the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal?

Help with an ODOB investigation, complaint or allegation starts here. This CPD course helps you remediate — and demonstrate the remediation, with a dated certificate for your written response, your portfolio or a Committee or Tribunal direction.

Buy this course — NZ$200 Bulk buy — any five or ten courses

Immediate access · certificate on completion · twelve months' access

2 CPD hours
Self-paced
Written for New Zealand
CPD certificate
Bulk buy: any 5 for NZ$850 · any 10 for NZ$1,400

At a glance

Who it is for: Any optometrist or dispensing optician facing an Optometrists and Dispensing Opticians Board complaint, notification or allegation, a Professional Conduct Committee investigation or a competence review about professional behaviour or conduct — an allegation of unprofessional behaviour or conduct
Authorities covered: The Optometrists and Dispensing Opticians Board, its Competence Review and Health Committees, its Professional Conduct Committees and the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal
Length: 10 sections, 70 lessons, 2 CPD hours
Format: Self-paced, online, immediate access, twelve months from purchase
Certificate: Issued by Healthcare Ethics Courses on completion, dated, with the course title and 2 CPD hours
Price: NZ$200 · any 5 for NZ$850 · any 10 for NZ$1,400

Certificate issued by Healthcare Ethics CoursesRemediation courses for regulatory processes.

2CPD hours, issued by Healthcare Ethics Courses

10Sections, nine closing with a reflective quiz

68Lessons, plus a post-course assessment

NZ$200One off. Twelve months' access

Who this course is for

Facing an allegation of unprofessional behaviour or conduct

The Board’s letter says a sales conversation, a referral not sent, a certificate signed, a record shared or a remark at the slit lamp fell short of the Standards of Ethical Conduct. This course is how you account for it — and show you have remediated.

Dealing with an ODOB complaint

The Registrar assesses it the day it arrives — with the Chair and the Board’s professional standards adviser where needed — and asks for your response. The clinical record, the dispensing record and the referral log show what happened, not why; this course gives your response the reasoning the Board reads for.

A complaint with the Health and Disability Commissioner

A complaint about a patient’s care goes to the Commissioner first, and the Board can act to reduce the risk of harm meanwhile. The Commissioner has found optometrists in breach over a missed retinal detachment and a glaucoma referral that came too late, and recommended audits, a written reflection and further training.

Before a Competence Review Committee

Peers review your practice against the standards of clinical competence for your profession, and the Board can require a competence programme — as it did after a missed retinal detachment. A dated certificate, an audit and a reflective account are evidence the Committee can weigh.

Before a Professional Conduct Committee

Two registered practitioners and a layperson, with a legal adviser, investigate independently, read your response and usually meet you. They can recommend counselling or a review, decide on conciliation or no further action, or lay a charge before the Tribunal.

Facing a misconduct charge or hearing before the Tribunal

A charge has been laid, or a penalty is being decided — and the Tribunal has struck off an optometrist who practised without a practising certificate and would not respond to the Board. Remediation completed before the hearing, dated and documented, is weighed every time.

The concerns this course speaks to

Referral, delay and the condition that could not wait

A field defect referred next month, a suspicious disc put on recall, a retinal symptom referred routine instead of urgent because the diary was full. The Standards make referral part of caring for patients, and the Commissioner has found optometrists in breach over a missed retinal detachment and a glaucoma referral that came years late.

The shop floor and the examination room

A patient frightened into a second pair, lenses upgraded without the difference explained, a target met at the expense of a need, a dispensing optician who advised on a condition. The Standards say incentives and targets must not affect clinical judgement, and how spectacles and upgrades are proposed and sold is professional conduct.

Probity, certificates and claims

A driver-licence eyesight certificate signed without the fields, a record written after the complaint and dated before it, a subsidy claim that did not match the dispensing, a qualification or a scope overstated. The Standards ask you to describe your skills accurately and to be open and honest; the course gives probity a section of its own.

Boundaries with patients and colleagues

A patient of years who became a friend or more, a gift accepted, a family member examined and certified, a message after hours, a colleague or a member of staff pursued. The Standards ask you always to maintain professional boundaries, and the Board’s boundaries standard places the responsibility with you.

Records that hold the reasoning

Notes that do not record the retinal examination, the field result or the photographs reviewed, a referral log that does not show the urgency, a record written after the complaint. The Commissioner called one optometrist’s notes “brief, at best”; the record is what a Committee reads first.

Registration and scope

Practising without a current practising certificate, a dispensing optician who diagnosed, an optometrist who prescribed outside their scope, a telehealth refraction without the examination the standard expects. The Tribunal struck off an optometrist who practised after his certificate lapsed; the course treats registration and scope as professional duties, not administrative ones.

Dealing with the Board and its Committees

Letters not answered, a Committee’s request ignored, a message to a witness that reads as pressure. The Tribunal found an optometrist’s failure to respond to the Board and its Professional Conduct Committee, with intimidating messages to a Board witness, to be professional misconduct; how you deal with the process is read as conduct in its own right.

Cultural safety and any other concern

A reluctance read as non-compliance, tikanga not asked about, whānau kept out when the patient wanted them there, a subsidy the whānau were not told about. The Standards ask you to understand Māori needs, values and beliefs and to promote equitable access. Any allegation is measured against a domain of the Standards — the course shows you how to find it and answer it.

Facing an ODOB investigation, complaint or allegation? This course helps you remediate — and demonstrate it.

Buy this course — NZ$200

What the course covers

Ten sections and 70 lessons, with a reflective quiz closing each of the first nine and a post-course assessment at the end.

Section 01

Introduction to Professionalism in Optometry and Dispensing Practice

Five lessons

Section 02

Core Attributes of Professionalism

Eight lessons

Section 03

Professional Boundaries in Optometry and Dispensing

Six lessons

Section 04

Communication and Professional Conduct

Eight lessons

Section 05

Documentation and Record Keeping

Seven lessons

Section 06

Professionalism in Challenging Situations

Ten lessons

Section 07

Cultural Safety and Professional Practice in New Zealand

Seven lessons

Section 08

Professionalism in Complaints, Competence Reviews, and Fitness to Practise

Nine lessons

Section 09

Reflective Practice, Insight, and Remediation

Eight lessons

Section 10

Conclusion and Key Takeaways

Key takeaways and the post-course assessment

Show every lesson title

Section 01 · Introduction to Professionalism in Optometry and Dispensing Practice: What is Professionalism in Optometry and Dispensing Practice?; Why Professionalism Matters; Core Components of Professionalism; Professionalism in Everyday Practice; Risks of Poor Professionalism.
Section 02 · Core Attributes of Professionalism: Integrity and Honesty; Accountability and Responsibility; Respect, Compassion, and Patient-Centred Care; Professional Boundaries; Communication Skills; Competence and Scope of Practice; Reliability and Professional Conduct; Ethical Awareness and Decision-Making.
Section 03 · Professional Boundaries in Optometry and Dispensing: Understanding Professional Boundaries in Eye Care Practice; Types of Professional Boundaries in Optometry and Dispensing; Boundary Risks in Optometry and Dispensing Practice; Maintaining Professional Boundaries; Recognising and Managing Boundary Concerns; Professional Boundaries and Fitness to Practise.
Section 04 · Communication and Professional Conduct: The Role of Communication in Professionalism; Principles of Effective Communication; Non-Verbal Communication and Professional Presence; Communication in Clinical Practice; Communication in Retail and Dispensing Environments; Communication in Challenging Situations; Cultural Considerations in Communication; Communication, Professional Conduct, and Fitness to Practise.
Section 05 · Documentation and Record Keeping: Importance of Documentation in Optometry and Dispensing Practice; Principles of High-Quality Record Keeping; Key Components of Optometry and Dispensing Records; Documentation in Clinical and Retail Contexts; Common Documentation Errors and Risks; Documentation and Fitness to Practise; Improving Documentation Practice.
Section 06 · Professionalism in Challenging Situations: Understanding Challenging Situations in Optometry and Dispensing Practice; Managing Difficult Patient Interactions; Managing Disagreement with Patients; Managing Clinical and Commercial Pressures; Managing Clinical Uncertainty and Risk; Responding to Errors and Adverse Events; Professionalism Under Pressure; Professionalism in Complaints and Investigations; Learning from Challenging Situations; Professionalism, Insight, and Fitness to Practise.
Section 07 · Cultural Safety and Professional Practice in New Zealand: Understanding Cultural Safety in Eye Care Practice; Te Tiriti o Waitangi and Professional Responsibility; Māori Health Perspectives in Eye Care; Addressing Health Inequities in Eye Care; Communication and Cultural Safety; Cultural Safety in the Clinical and Retail Environment; Cultural Safety and Fitness to Practise.
Section 08 · Professionalism in Complaints, Competence Reviews, and Fitness to Practise: Understanding Complaints in Optometry and Dispensing Practice; Professional Response to Complaints; Competence Reviews in New Zealand; Understanding Fitness to Practise; Professional Behaviour During Investigations; Insight and Reflection in Professionalism; Remediation and Professional Improvement; Preventing Complaints and Competence Concerns; Professionalism, Trust, and Public Confidence.
Section 09 · Reflective Practice, Insight, and Remediation: Understanding Reflective Practice in Eye Care; Developing Insight in Professional Practice; Structured Reflective Practice; Writing Effective Reflective Statements; Understanding Remediation in Eye Care Practice; Demonstrating Effective Remediation; Reflective Practice, Insight, and Fitness to Practise; Embedding Reflective Practice in Daily Professionalism.
Section 10 · Conclusion and Key Takeaways: Conclusion; Key Takeaways.

How to respond to an ODOB notification, complaint or allegation

The Registrar has already triaged the complaint; your response is what the Board decides on next. A Competence Review Committee, a Conduct Committee and the Tribunal read it for the same four things.

The Board reads your response against the clinical record, the referral log and the till.

The factsThe events in order, plainly, with the record, the referral log and any certificate cited rather than described.Weak and strong responses to the same events show the tone that works.
Which domain or standardRespect for patients for the sale, care for patients for the referral, the release standard for the record shared, integrity for the certificate — named by you first.The course takes the Standards’ four domains as behaviour, so you can name the one that applies.
The effectOn the patient in the patient’s terms — the sight, the money, the trust — rather than in clinical language.The reflective account has a section of its own, with a weak and a strong one side by side.
What someone else can confirmSomething changed, with dates, that a mentor, an auditor or a written protocol can confirm.This course is the dated item you attach — and it tells you how to build the rest.

A response that blames the target or the head office is not a reflection — and do not send the first draft.

Take advice from your indemnity insurer, your union or a lawyer before you respond to anyone.

Facing an ODOB investigation, complaint or allegation? This course helps you remediate — and demonstrate it.

Buy this course — NZ$200

How this course helps with an ODOB investigation

The Board asks whether the next patient is safe on both sides of the door, and reads your response for the answer

The Board’s purpose under the Act is public safety, so it asks whether the practitioner will behave differently at the slit lamp and at the till, and answers from three things: reflection specific to the event, insight that accepts the seriousness without qualification, and remediation someone else can verify. The course pairs weak and strong responses to the same events — the second pair, the referral in the drawer, the eyesight certificate, the record shared with the branch, the friendship with a patient — so the difference is visible before you write.

Remediation a Competence Review Committee or a Conduct Committee can verify

Counts: this course’s dated certificate; CPD targeted to the domain concerned; a mentor’s or peer’s written reports; an audit of records, referrals, certificates or dispensing repeated after an interval; a written referral protocol and a certificate protocol; patient feedback gathered for the purpose; Māori-led cultural safety education where the concern engages it; restitution where money is involved. Counts for little: hours on another subject, the head office or the target blamed, an apology for the complaint, and reflection that argues the case. For the stages from the first letter to the Tribunal, see the Council and Board investigation process, explained.

Read the primary sources

Who wrote it

Dr Shehzad Iqbal

Course author and facilitator, Healthcare Ethics New Zealand

Dr Iqbal has designed and delivered ethics, probity and professionalism training for healthcare professionals since 2020, working with registrants across regulated health professions, online and face to face. He combines clinical practice with formal postgraduate training in healthcare law and ethics.

MBBS · MRCS · MRCGP · Postgraduate Certificate in Healthcare Law and Ethics, University of Dundee

Written and reviewed by Dr Shehzad Iqbal. Last reviewed September 2026.

In short

Professionalism and Professional Standards for Optometrists and Dispensing Opticians is a two-hour, self-paced remediation course for practitioners registered with the Optometrists and Dispensing Opticians Board facing a notification, investigation, complaint or allegation, written to the Board’s Standards of Ethical Conduct and its specific standards. It is written for a profession practised on both sides of one door: what the Board means by professionalism — four domains and the standards around them — the lapses notifications often describe — the sale and the sight test, honesty in records, certificates and claims, referral and delay, boundaries, release of information across a chain, scope between the two professions, advertising, cultural safety — and what a credible response contains for a notification, a Competence Review Committee, a Professional Conduct Committee or the Tribunal. Ten sections, the first nine closing with a reflective quiz, a post-course assessment, and a dated certificate from Healthcare Ethics Courses for your recertification. It is remediation and dated evidence of it; it decides no matter, and it is not a substitute for advice from your indemnity insurer, your professional association or a lawyer.

What the Board means by professionalism

The Standards of Ethical Conduct organise professional behaviour under four domains — respect patients, care for patients, work collaboratively with others, contribute to improving the health of the community. Around them sit the Board’s specific standards: professional boundaries, clinical competence for each profession, cultural competence and cultural safety, telehealth, electronic communications, release of patient information and advertising.

Three features of eye care run through it. The door: for many practitioners the examination and the sale happen in one building, sometimes under a target, and the Standards say targets must not affect clinical judgement. The two professions: an optometrist and a dispensing optician often share a practice with different scopes. The referral: eye care is where sight-threatening conditions are first seen, and a referral not sent, or sent late, is read as conduct as well as competence.

What these words mean

The three terms that decide where a matter goes, and the other words the course uses.

Professional Conduct Committee: Two registered practitioners and a layperson, with a legal adviser, a statutory committee that investigates independently where a notification is about conduct or a conviction. It may recommend counselling, a competence or scope review or a Police referral, determine no further action or conciliation, or lay a charge before the Tribunal.
Professional misconduct: The Tribunal’s ground under s 100 of the Act: malpractice or negligence in your scope of practice, or conduct that has brought or was likely to bring discredit to the profession. Dishonesty, a boundary breach and a breach of confidence are among the findings made under it.
The three routes under the HPCA Act: Fitness to practise is the phrase practitioners use for the whole process. Under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 the Council or Board takes one of three routes: a competence review (your practice against the required standard); the health process — the Act’s fitness to practise provisions, for impairment by a mental or physical condition; or a referral of your conduct to a Professional Conduct Committee, which can lay a charge of professional misconduct before the Tribunal. Which route your letter names tells you how the matter is being treated.

The Standards, the Board’s specific standards, the committees and the other terms the course uses

Standards of Ethical Conduct: The Board’s statement of the behaviour expected of every optometrist and dispensing optician, in four domains: respect patients, care for patients, work collaboratively with others, contribute to the health of the community. The document a notification is measured against and the one a response should cite by domain.
Standard on the maintenance of professional boundaries: The Board’s standard, version 4, November 2024, on sexual boundaries, gifts and financial arrangements, family and whānau, and where the responsibility sits — solely with the practitioner.
Standards of clinical competence: Separate standards for optometrists and for dispensing opticians, the measure a Competence Review Committee applies and the line between the two scopes that the shop floor blurs.
Competence Review Committee: Two peers and a layperson who spend a day at your practice — interviews, systems, equipment, record keeping, observation of examinations where appropriate — and report your practice as of an acceptable standard, acceptable with recommendations, or in need of a competence programme.
Release of patient information: The Board’s standard on when and how a patient’s record may be shared — with another branch, a head office, an insurer, an employer, a licensing agency — and on the consent that release requires. The standard a record shared across a chain is measured against.
Insight: Acceptance of the seriousness of a lapse and its effect on the patient and on public trust, without minimising it or shifting responsibility to the target, the head office or the patient. Read for in every response, and weighed by the Tribunal when it sets a penalty.
Remediation: Corrective action targeted to the lapse and verifiable by someone else: CPD on the standard concerned, mentoring or peer review with reports, an audit of records, referrals, certificates or dispensing repeated over time, a referral protocol, feedback gathered on purpose. CPD hours on an unrelated subject count for little on their own.

The provisions a professionalism concern about an optometrist or dispensing optician engages

Professionalism is conduct, and the Optometrists and Dispensing Opticians Board’s standards say what professional conduct is for the profession. These are the standard itself and the provisions of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 a professionalism notification about an optometrist or dispensing optician runs under.

Optometrists and Dispensing Opticians Board — Standards of Ethical Conduct

The Standards of Ethical Conduct for Optometrists and Dispensing Opticians, with the Board’s standards on professional boundaries, clinical competence, release of patient information and advertising. Every professionalism complaint about an optometrist or a dispensing optician names a part of them. Read it.

For this course: The course takes the Standards of Ethical Conduct as behaviour in the consulting room and on the shop floor, so that a response names the standard the conduct fell short of.

Section 71 — referral to a Professional Conduct Committee

A conduct concern — a sale, a certificate, a record, a boundary, a failure to respond — is referred to a Professional Conduct Committee of two registered practitioners and a layperson, with a legal adviser, which investigates independently, asks for your response and usually meets you. Read it.

For this course: A professionalism concern is a conduct concern and is referred here; the course explains what the Committee will ask for.

Section 100 — the grounds of discipline

The Tribunal may discipline for professional misconduct — malpractice or negligence, or conduct likely to bring discredit to the profession — among other grounds, and for practising without a practising certificate. An optometrist who did so and would not respond to the Board was struck off. Read it.

For this course: Conduct that brings discredit to the profession is a ground of discipline, and the course explains how it has been applied in the profession.

Section 101 — the penalties

Censure, conditions, suspension for up to three years, cancellation of registration, a fine of up to NZ$30,000 and costs. Insight and remediation are weighed every time, and so is how you dealt with the Board along the way. Read it.

For this course: The Tribunal’s penalties in conduct cases in the profession weigh pattern and insight; the course shows how to set out the second in your own reflection.

Also engaged: Section 118 — the Board sets the Standards a complaint is measured against · Section 34 — practitioners and employers must notify a risk of harm · Section 80 — what a Professional Conduct Committee may recommend, from counselling to a charge · Section 36 — a competence review where professionalism and competence overlap.

What happens after a complaint reaches the Optometrists and Dispensing Opticians Board

The stages a complaint about an optometrist or a dispensing optician can pass through. At every one the same evidence is read: a specific reflection, insight that does not qualify itself, and remediation someone else can confirm — the earlier it exists, the earlier the matter ends.

The Registrar triages the complaint, and asks for your response
The Registrar assesses every complaint the day it arrives, with the Chair and the professional standards adviser where needed: what the Board can act on, whether anything is needed while it is looked at, and which route it takes. A complaint about care goes to the Health and Disability Commissioner first.
The route
No further action, a Competence Review Committee, the Health Committee or a Professional Conduct Committee. A defensible decision — a need explained and a pair chosen, a referral sent with the urgency it needed — usually ends on a response that shows the reasoning and the record.
A Competence Review Committee
Peers review your practice against the standards of clinical competence for your profession. The outcome can be no further action, recommendations, or a competence programme — supervision or mentoring, targeted education and review.
The Health Committee
Where a condition may affect your practice, the Committee may require a medical examination and set conditions, accept undertakings or suspend you while you cannot practise — a health process, not a disciplinary one.
A Professional Conduct Committee
Two registered practitioners and a layperson, with a legal adviser, investigate independently, read your response, usually meet you, and recommend anything from no further action, counselling or conciliation to a charge before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal
A legally qualified chair, three members of your profession and a layperson hear the charge, usually in public. An optometrist who practised without a practising certificate and would not respond to the Board was struck off; any order is reviewed against what has changed.

Facing an ODOB investigation, complaint or allegation? This course helps you remediate — and demonstrate it.

Buy this course — NZ$200

Not an optometrist or a dispensing optician? New Zealand regulates 18 professions under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003, and the process is the same for all — courses for every registered profession →

Frequently asked questions

What does the Board want to see in my written response?

The events in order and plainly; the domain of the Standards or the specific standard you fell short of, named by you before the Board names it; the effect on the patient in their terms; what you have done since, with dates and a mentor’s or peer’s confirmation; and what would be different next time. The course sets weak and strong responses to the same events side by side.

The complaint is about a sale, not the examination. Is that a Board matter?

Yes. The Standards say incentives and targets must not affect clinical judgement and that any personal stake in an option you recommend is disclosed, and how spectacles, lenses and upgrades are proposed and sold is professional conduct. A patient frightened into a second pair, or an upgrade whose benefit was not explained, is the complaint the course’s section on the shop floor is written for.

Does completing this course count as remediation?

It is one dated item. Remediation the Board recognises is targeted to the lapse and verifiable by someone else: CPD on the standard concerned, a mentor’s or peer’s reports, an audit of records, referrals, certificates or dispensing repeated after an interval, a written referral protocol, feedback gathered on purpose, and reflection that cites the Standards. No provider is accredited by the Board and no course decides a matter; check the wording of any direction with your indemnity insurer, professional association or lawyer.

Should I take advice before I respond to the Board?

Yes — before anything is written to the Board, a Competence Review Committee, a Professional Conduct Committee, the Tribunal or your employer, and the Registrar’s immediate triage is a reason to seek it early. And answer the Board: not responding has itself been found to be misconduct. Nothing on this page is legal advice, and no course determines the outcome of a matter.

A referral was delayed and the patient lost vision. Is that competence or conduct?

Both, which is why it is in this course. Caring for patients includes the referral and the urgency the condition demands. The Commissioner has found optometrists in breach where a retinal detachment was referred routine and a glaucoma referral came too late; a response is read for whether the delay is owned, the system that allowed it is named, and a referral protocol now exists in writing.

I signed a driver-licence eyesight certificate for a regular patient without repeating the fields. Is that dishonesty?

The Board would read it as integrity before anything else. A certificate states that an examination was done and a standard met, and one signed without the proper checks rather than on findings is a false statement to a licensing agency whatever the patient’s actual vision. The course covers certificates, records and claims together because the Board reads them together.

Our chain shares records between branches. Where is the line?

At the patient’s consent and the purpose of the release. The Board’s standard on release of patient information governs sharing with another branch, a head office, an insurer, an employer or a licensing agency, and the Health Information Privacy Code adds the law. A record shared for the patient’s care with their knowledge is one thing; one shared for a marketing list or without the patient asked is another. The course covers records, release and the chain in a section.

I am a dispensing optician and the complaint says I gave clinical advice. Is that professionalism?

Yes. The Board keeps separate standards of clinical competence for the two professions, and a dispensing optician who diagnosed, or an optometrist who prescribed outside their scope, has acted outside the scope the register shows. The course treats scope between the two professions as one of eye care’s recurring conduct questions.

Is cultural safety a conduct matter for eye care practitioners?

Yes. The Standards ask you to understand Māori needs, values and beliefs, to be sensitive to different cultures and to promote equitable access, and the Board’s cultural competence and cultural safety standard applies — who is in the room, how a reluctance is read, and whether a subsidy was explained. A complaint about tikanga ignored or whānau kept out is a professionalism complaint.

How is this course different from the Ethics course for optometrists and dispensing opticians?

The Ethics course is about the reasoning — the need against the sale, the referral against the diary, confidentiality against the chain and the licensing agency, the certificate. This course is about conduct: the behaviours the Standards require, the lapses that produce complaints, and the response and remediation a professionalism matter calls for.

How long does it take, and how long do I have access?

The course is 2 CPD hours, self-paced, with twelve months’ access from purchase. The certificate is issued on completion, dated, with the course title and the CPD hours, for your recertification, a competence programme or a response.

Notifications rarely raise one issue. These are the courses that pair with this one.

Ethics and Ethical Standards for Optometrists and Dispensing Opticians

An ODOB notification about ethics: a missed or delayed referral, records, boundaries, or commercial pressure on a clinical decision. 2 CPD hours.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Documentation for Healthcare Professionals

Clinical documentation and health records course for NZ health practitioners facing a notification about records, late entries or amendments. 2 CPD hours.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Ensuring Clinical Competence and Patient Safety

When a notification or competence review concerns clinical competence: assessment, diagnosis, deterioration, medication, follow-up and scope. 2 CPD hours.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Effective Communication for Healthcare Professionals

Communication course for NZ health practitioners facing a notification about manner, omission, honesty, explanation or handover. 2 CPD hours, NZ$200.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Financial Integrity for Healthcare Professionals

Financial integrity course for NZ health practitioners facing a billing, fee, ACC or third-party payer concern. Financial consent and conflicts. 2 CPD hrs.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Dealing with a Complaint or Investigation Professionally

Responding to a complaint, notification, competence review or conduct committee in NZ: the first letter, the meeting, what to write. 2 CPD hours.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Rebuilding Trust of Patients, Colleagues, the Public and the Regulator

After a notification, conditions or a Tribunal finding in NZ, what is assessed is what you did next: insight, remediation, evidence of change. 2 CPD hours.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200