Hospital found negligent in privileging physician
Credentialing Resource Center Connection, August 15, 2007
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Credentialing Resource Center Connection!
A jury found Putnam General Hospital in Hurricane, WV, negligent in privileging a physician who was later accused of medical malpractice in more than 100 orthopedic surgeries, according to a July 31 Associated Press article.
Questions in the civil trial that concluded July 31 centered not on medical malpractice, but rather on whether the hospital sufficiently checked John King, MD's background before it granted him temporary privileges to perform surgery at the facility.
Media reports about the case surfaced four years ago when the osteopathic surgeon's short tenure at Putnam General spurred a high number of lawsuits. The hospital suspended King's privileges in May 2003, the article reports.
According to the Associated Press, a lawyer for the plaintiff cited King's suspension from a hospital in Alabama, his abrupt departures from other hospitals and training programs, and incomplete internships as evidence that the hospital was negligent during the credentialing process. However, Putnam General's attorney argued during the trial that the hospital adequately followed a screening process before granting King temporary privileges.
The Putnam County Circuit Court jury deliberated for roughly one hour before it decided against the hospital, the Associated Press article states. The ruling means that plaintiffs can seek punitive damages against Putnam General in the medical malpractice lawsuits against King, which allege unnecessary surgeries, botched operations, and other medical errors.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Credentialing Resource Center Connection!
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
