Avoid these common mistakes to keep peer review information protected

Failing to keep peer review information protected could lead to the waiving of peer review protection or jeopardize the confidentiality of the process. Anne Roberts, CPCS, CPMSM, senior director of medical affairs at Children's Medical Center of Dallas, provides the following list of common mistakes that physician leaders, administrators, and medical staff professionals can make:

  • Allowing non-peers to address peer review matters (administrators vs. physician peers).
  • Sharing documents or communications with parties who are not privy to the information.
  • Addressing peer review matters through general hospital procedures instead of centralizing them under the scope of the peer review committee.
  • Providing information to the physician under review that he or she is not privy to.
  • Failing to engage legal counsel in a timely manner.
  • Deviating from bylaws or policies.
  • Not ensuring a thorough, comprehensive review/investigation. Don't cut corners and ensure you have all relevant facts from all relevant parties.
  • Not having the appropriate party conduct the review. Organizations need to ensure that someone with the appropriate qualifications conducts the review. If there is no one available on staff—perhaps there is a lack of qualified expertise or there are only competitors—then organizations should use external reviewers as deemed appropriate.
  • Failing to escalate requests for corrective action to the medical executive committee or governing body (follow your bylaws), or failing to take corrective action in a timely manner.
  • Failing to follow reporting requirements set by the NPDB and the state medical board.
  • Failing to disclose corrective action to third parties who request the information with the appropriate third-party release form. If the other organization grants privileges to the involved provider and subsequently a patient there is harmed, and it is determined that the lack of disclosure from your organization was a contributing factor, your organization could end up being held liable.

Source: Credentialing & Peer Review Legal Insider