Sham Peer Review: Consequences and Remedy

Gruessner, Rainer W.G.; Poston, Robert; Gharagozloo, Farid

doi:10.30654/mjcr.10089

“…The legally guaranteed immunity allows hospitals to keep their actions confidential and information privileged from legal discovery. It also allows hospital administrators to officially distance themselves from the accused physician for several reasons and from a process they know was corrupt or fear of being blamed for a negative outcome [4][5][6][7][8].…”

Section: Controversies Surrounding Hcqiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Constitutional Violations by the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (HCQIA) and the Reporting by the National Practitioner Databank (NPDB): Focusing on the Preservation of the Civil Rights of Physicians

Gharagozloo¹,

Poston²

2023

J Med Healthcare

1

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 1986, the US Congress passed the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986. (HCQIA) was designed to protect the health and safety of the public by 1) enhancing the Peer Review process through protection for peer review members from lawsuits, and 2) providing a national repository for reported information regarding medical malpractice payments and adverse actions involving physicians, which among other things, would monitor the movement of incompetent or unprofessional physicians. The framers of HCQIA did not foresee that in 2023, hospitals and employers will invariably deny employment and/or hospital privileges based on an NPDB report outlining loss of hospital privileges or relinquishment of hospital privileges under investigation. Such an adverse report by NPDB results in the inability of the physician to obtain employment or practice in a hospital. Therefore, in 2023, the unintended consequence of the reporting of adverse peer review actions by NPDB, an agency of the Federal Government, can violate the constitutional and civil rights of the said physicians.

show abstract

“…The legally guaranteed immunity allows hospitals to keep their actions confidential and information privileged from legal discovery. It also allows hospital administrators to officially distance themselves from the accused physician for several reasons and from a process they know was corrupt or fear of being blamed for a negative outcome [4][5][6][7][8] .…”

Section: Opinionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preserving the Credibility of the Physician Peer Review System

Gharagozloo

¹

,

Gruessner

²

,

Postopm

³

2023

ijirms

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A just, equitable, and credible peer review process is the cornerstone of a high quality and safe Health Care System. The importance of an unbiased and protected Peer Review System is codified in the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986, HCQIA. However, the peer review process may go wrong when in the new landscape of healthcare which is dominated by large hospital organizations and the big business of medicine, the peer review system may be misused for reasons other than to ensure compliance to the highest standards of professionalism in the interest of the public and the profession. In those instances, due to the immunity protection, which is afforded by HCQIA, contrived allegations of incompetence or disruptive behavior may be used to retaliate against physicians. Most physicians are not familiar with these complex issues which can affect their careers. It is time for a comprehensive discourse among physicians and healthcare attorneys with the singular goal of preserving the legitimacy of Peer Review.

show abstract

“…The legally guaranteed immunity allows hospitals to keep their actions confidential and information privileged from legal discovery. It also allows hospital administrators to officially distance themselves from the accused physician for several reasons and from a process they know was corrupt or fear of being blamed for a negative outcome [4][5][6][7][8].…”

Section: Short Commentarymentioning

confidence: 99%