Ask the expert: Who needs to approve the scope of work for privileged mid-wives?
Credentialing Resource Center Connection, February 7, 2008
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Credentialing Resource Center Connection!
Q: Our family medicine program is looking to add the mid-wives hospital group to provide on-call delivery services for our OB/GYN patients. They will be employed as on-call staff providing services in the hospital only. They are privileged through the hospital. Do they need to be approved by our committee and board also or is the hospital privileging sufficient?
A: At the present time, midwives are considered to be an independent allied health practitioner, (AHP) as defined by The Joint Commission, in all states with the exception of California, Florida, Massachusetts, North Carolina, and South Carolina. The scope of practice for midwives may vary in definition from state to state.
The Joint Commission requires healthcare organizations to establish their own policy defining clinical privileges for the independent AHP. The privileges approved by the organization's governing body define the scope of care AHPs may provide to patients. Healthcare organizations must credential and privilege AHPs by the same process it has established for members of the medical staff.
This week's reader-submitted question was sent in by Marisa McCampbell, a credentialing specialist at Michigan State University/Kalamazoo Center for Medical Studies, an outpatient clinic and teaching facility for residents. WendySue Woods, RN, MHSA, senior consultant with The Greeley Company, a division of HCPro, Inc., answered it.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Credentialing Resource Center Connection!
Comments
0 comments on “Ask the expert: Who needs to approve the scope of work for privileged mid-wives? ”
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- Identify potential Medicaid RAC target areas
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- E-mailed
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Q&A: Follow CMS' coding guidelines when using modifier -25
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Q/A. One injection code or two?
- ED-to-inpatient transfers are flawed with safety gaps
- Searched
