Horty Springer Houston Healthcare Medical Staff Leadership Activities: Legal "Lessons Learned 4.17.23
Upon completion of this activity, participants should:
• Understand the importance of follow up on incomplete information on medical staff applications
• Be able to identify peer review practices that can be legally risky and unfair, and fashion solutions to eliminate such practices from the peer review process
• Identify and appropriately manage conflicts of interest that may arise during the medical staff’s policy-making, credentialing, and peer review processes
• Understand the critical role references play in quality assurance and fashion processes to be forthcoming and truthful in references, while managing legal risk
JOHNSON V. MISERCORDIA COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
The importance of following up on incomplete applications for credentials
POWELL V. BEAR VALLEY COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
The respective roles of the Board and Medical Staff in credentialing matters
FRIGO V. SILVER CROSS HOSPITAL
Consistency in privileging matters
NURSE MIDWIFERY ASSOCIATES V. HIBBETT
Carefully managing conflicts of interest key to fairness in privileging determinations
POLINER V. TEXAS HEALTH SYSTEMS
Eliminating “track and trend” and promoting transparency and fundamental fairness in peer
ROSS V. CHOPRA
Documentation of collegial intervention and other Medical Staff activities
KADLEC MEDICAL CENTER V. LAKEWOOD REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER
Giving forthcoming and truthful references, even when you have something “not nice” to say
MANHAS V. FRANCISCAN HAMMOND CLINIC
Carefully drafted authorization and release language is key to protecting physician leaders
The information presented at this CME program represents the views and opinions of the individual presenters, and does not constitute the opinion or endorsement of, or promotion by, the UPMC Center for Continuing Education in the Health Sciences, UPMC / University of Pittsburgh Medical Center or Affiliates and University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine. Reasonable efforts have been taken intending for educational subject matter to be presented in a balanced, unbiased fashion and in compliance with regulatory requirements. However, each program attendee must always use his/her own personal and professional judgment when considering further application of this information, particularly as it may relate to patient diagnostic or treatment decisions including, without limitation, FDA-approved uses and any off-label uses.
Rachel Remaley, JD
No members of the planning committee, speakers, presenters, authors, content reviewers and/or anyone else in a position to control the content of this education activity have relevant financial relationships with any proprietary entity producing, marketing, re-selling, or distributing health care goods or services, used on, or consumed by, patients to disclose.
In support of improving patient care, this activity has been planned and implemented by the University of Pittsburgh and Horty Springer Seminars. The University of Pittsburgh is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.
The University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine designates this live activity for a maximum of .75 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
Other health care professionals:
Other health care professionals will receive a certificate of attendance confirming the number of contact hours commensurate with the extent of participation in this activity.
- 0.75 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™The University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
- 0.75 Attendance