A recent case examines the tension between a physician’s efforts to obtain information about a disputed recertification decision and the confidentiality protections afforded to medical peer review.
Credentialing Resource Center Journal - Volume 35, Issue 10
Fragmented oversight across quality, risk, compliance, and patient safety can let warning signs go unnoticed until regulators or plaintiffs’ attorneys connect them after the fact. That same fragmentation can also affect malpractice exposure.
Credentialing Resource Center Journal - Volume 35, Issue 9
Organizations have a responsibility to continually evaluate the competency of providers—yet in today’s healthcare environment, they should not assume low volume is evidence of incompetence. Instead, low volume should be treated as a signal to examine the available evidence of a provider’s...
Credentialing Resource Center Journal - Volume 35, Issue 9
A recent California appellate court decision addresses the evidentiary requirements necessary to sustain a claim against a hospital for negligent credentialing.
Credentialing Resource Center Journal - Volume 35, Issue 9
For credentialing professionals, Operation Nightingale serves as a reminder that credential verification is a foundational component of patient safety and organizational risk management.
Credentialing Resource Center Journal - Volume 35, Issue 8
A recent court decision addressed the scope of Illinois' Medical Studies Act privilege and the evidentiary burden hospitals must satisfy when withholding credentialing and peer review documents from discovery.
Credentialing Resource Center Journal - Volume 35, Issue 8
