It's true--the burden is on the applicant
Credentialing Resource Center Connection, March 5, 2003
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Credentialing Resource Center Connection!
Dear Credentialing Colleague:
You know it, lawyers know it, and management knows it.
There is no question--the burden of producing adequate information or answering any reasonable question lies with the applicant or reapplicant. It is not the credentials committee's or the medical staff office's (MSO) job to fret over gaps in the applicant's work history. It is not the MSO's job to pry information out of a licensing board or another hospital. It is not the MSO's job to coax references out of reluctant individuals.
The burden is on the applicant. If an application shows a significant gap in a practitioner's practice history, the credentials committee chair, vice president of medical affairs (VPMA), or other appropriate individual should simply pick up the phone, call the applicant, and ask him or her for a complete explanation. The MSO should then attempt to confirm this explanation with reliable outside sources.
For example, let's say the application indicates no clinical or educational activity for a two-year period approximately four years ago. The VPMA calls the applicant and finds out he or she was recovering from a major illness during the two-year period. Now the VPMA is reluctant to ask further questions on account of privacy issues, the Americans with Disabilities Act, etc. Despite this reluctance, the VPMA must follow up and ask the applicant how the hospital can verify his explanation.
Once all of the appropriate questions are asked, the medical staff office then should begin to verify the explanation contacting the indicated individual by telephone or letter. Compile all information into a report, date it, sign it, and maintain it in the credentials file for review by the credentials committee.
The goal here is not to unnecessarily delay the process, but to make sure the applicant's explanation is, in fact, accurate.
That's all for this week.
All the best,
Hugh Greeley
www.greeley.com/seminars/
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Credentialing Resource Center Connection!
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- HIPAA Q&A: Flu shot requirement for hospital employees
- Running an effective peer review committee meeting
- HealthDataInsights posts new issues for medical necessity claims
- Sneak Peek: Effort underway to establish caseload benchmarks
- New FAQ posted on storing laryngoscope blades
- Q/A: Coding for telescopic intraocular lens
- Tip: Perform your own internal investigation prior to government audit
- HIPAA 5010 deadline extended, but threat remains, says AMA
- HHS task force: Consider privacy, security with text messages
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- E-mailed
-
- Running an effective peer review committee meeting
- HIPAA Q&A: Flu shot requirement for hospital employees
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- HHS task force: Consider privacy, security with text messages
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Q/A: Coding for telescopic intraocular lens
- Q/A: Correct use of modifier -PT
- Tip: Correctly code bilateral pain management procedures
- "Wall fountains" may be spreading Legionnaires to patients, visitors
- 2012 CPT code changes for ASCs: Shoulder and knee scopes and pain management
- Searched
