Rethink your AHP policy
Credentialing Resource Center Connection , May 28, 2003
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Credentialing Resource Center Connection !
Dear Credentialing Colleague:
Let me tell you about a fair hearing that recently took place at a typical American hospital. This hearing lasted slightly over eight hours, involved five fair-hearing panel members, two lawyers, three witnesses for the appellant, and four witnesses for the medical executive committee (MEC). Also in attendance were one court reporter, one representative of management, and the appellant's employer.
The cost of this hearing, including all time spent, added up to nearly one-third of the appellant's annual salary. Fortunately, there was no appeal to the board of directors.
And just what action prompted this large expenditure of resources? The MEC had recommended the revocation of privileges previously granted to an orthopedic surgeon's casting tech. Yes, this non-licensed, non-certified casting tech had been granted clinical privileges.
Prior to the fair hearing, this tech acted without professionalism, courtesy, or dignity while in the hospital. After considerable investigation and deliberation, the MEC decided to revoke his privileges.
One might wonder why this individual was granted clinical privileges and given the right to a hearing in the first place. At the very most, his employer could have been granted permission to employ the casting tech's services pursuant to hospital policy. Revoking such permission would not, under any circumstances, give rise to a hearing.
The hospital's explanation for granting privileges to this allied health professional (AHP) was as follows:
"We were told by a JCAHO surveyor to grant privileges to all allied health professionals."
As most readers know, JCAHO standards do not require all AHPs to be privileged. The only AHPs to which the privileging mechanism applies are licensed independent practitioners who practice without supervision. The casting tech does not meet either criterion.
Review your policies and procedures to ensure that simple matters do not become overly complex at your institution.
That's all for this week.
All the best,
Hugh Greeley
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Credentialing Resource Center Connection !
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Q/A: May we bill an E/M code for a wound care first visit
- Peer Review Monthly: Do you know what I know?
- Omnicare to pay $98 million to settle kickback charges
- Eliminate missed charges, errors to reduce lost revenue
- 2010 ICD-9 code updates now available online
- Study: Action can be taken to reduce dementia risk
- New, more deadly strain of MRSA found
- Understand the H1N1 Flu and how to code it
- Texas Hospital group pays U.S. $27.5 million in false claims settlement
- Consulting & Training
- E-mailed
-
- Q/A: May we bill an E/M code for a wound care first visit
- Omnicare to pay $98 million to settle kickback charges
- Peer Review Monthly: Do you know what I know?
- Eliminate missed charges, errors to reduce lost revenue
- IDTF rules for physician offices nixed for 2009
- Medicare patients suffer from a medical error every 1.7 minutes
- New, more deadly strain of MRSA found
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- Study: Action can be taken to reduce dementia risk
- Important CY 2009 OPPS status indicator changes
- Searched
