While physicians generally understand that standards evolve over time, they also expect changes to be communicated clearly, introduced consistently, and applied fairly. When that doesn't happen, even necessary policy revisions can become a source of frustration.
Credentialing Resource Center Journal - Volume 35, Issue 8
Hospitals invest heavily in accreditation readiness, communication protocols, and patient safety systems. But when a case moves into litigation, those same systems are examined through a different lens—not as policy, but as proof.
As data grows more complex and hospitals face continued staffing pressures, long-term credentialing success requires an infrastructure that keeps provider information accurate, accessible, and continuously maintained.
Credentialing Resource Center Journal - Volume 35, Issue 7
Long-term operational improvement depends just as heavily on culture: How teams communicate, how accountability is handled, whether staff feel supported, and whether people understand the “why” behind increasingly complex credentialing work.
Accreditation and quality leaders have long relied on The Joint Commission’s most frequently scored standards as a barometer for risk of getting a finding. However, that approach alone may no longer be enough.
Credentialing Resource Center Journal - Volume 35, Issue 7
Intensive care units (ICU) are among the most controlled clinical environments, but they also present unique security challenges. Review strategies for de-escalation, coordination with clinical teams, and more.
Structuring a clearly defined hospital process for new and special privileges is necessary to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements, maintain patient safety, and protect against liability.
Whether it’s shifting verification and paperwork responsibilities, workforce shortages, provider onboarding delays, competency assessments, or interoperability challenges, medical staff services professionals contend with more than their share of change today.
Credentialing Resource Center Journal - Volume 35, Issue 7
A recent decision by the North Carolina Court of Appeals underscores the expansive reach of collateral estoppel when parties are deemed to be in privity (i.e., in a substantive legal relationship) and have already effectively litigated the same issues.
