The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency does not require doctors to practise under the name that they are registered under

To the Editor: Within our clinical practice, we sought to establish the qualifications of a medical practitioner. In doing so, we discovered that medical practitioners are not required to practise under the name that they are listed under on the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) Register of Practitioners. A practitioner may register under one name, then practise under another. We see this as problematic for patients and inconsistent with the function of the register.

AHPRA states that the register “has accurate, up to date information about the registration status of all registered health practitioners in Australia. It is an important way the National Registration and Accreditation Scheme helps keep the public safe”.1 The national register lists all practitioners registered with AHPRA and any conditions on their registration. Patients may access this information if they feel unable to make enquiries directly of a practitioner, or if they wish to view particulars before seeing the practitioner.

AHPRA states that “if a practitioner's name does not appear on the register, they are not registered to practise in Australia”. The stated exemption to this statement is that “in a very small number of cases, the details of a registered health practitioner may not appear on the register because of personal safety issues”.1

It is under Part 10 of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Act 2009 that each national Board is empowered to maintain the register of all health practitioners currently registered by that Board.2 We note the current consultation paper by the COAG Health Council,3 in preparation for a second tranche of amendments to the National Law, which includes the proposal that the National Law be amended to “enable a practitioner to nominate one or more aliases or additional names to be recorded on the public register, with the register searchable using the alias”.3 We believe this relatively simple measure is consistent with the rights of the practitioner to use a favoured name and of the patient to confirm a practitioner's registration. We therefore support this change.