Tip of the week: Critical responsibilities for effective oversight of the peer review process
Medical Staff Leader Connection, July 28, 2011
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Medical Staff Leader Connection!
The oversight function of the peer review process involves all the actions necessary to oversee the process to ensure that it is done correctly.
The oversight function is not always familiar to physicians because in many hospitals, the peer review process is not organized to perform it. Medical staff oversight of the peer review process may simply be an afterthought—they may do only what the quality staff tell them to do with regard to measurement, evaluation of data, and so forth, or they may resolve only controversial cases. To create an evaluation process that truly focuses on physician improvement, however, the medical staff must establish an active oversight structure with clearly assigned responsibilities that support the goals of peer review. Such an oversight structure will, for example, select relevant physician measures for all six performance dimensions and prioritize resource use.
Medical staff responsibilities critical to effective oversight of the peer review process include:
- Standardizing and coordinating the case review process to ensure reliability
- Ensuring consistent interpretation of physician performance data
- Selecting relevant physician measures for all performance dimensions or general competencies
- Ensuring that data is systematically collected and analyzed
- Ensuring that identified performance improvement opportunities are addressed
- Ensuring availability of physician performance data for feedback and reappointment
- Prioritizing the use of resources for measuring physician performance
This week’s tip is from Effective Peer Review, Second Edition: A Practical Guide to Contemporary Design by Robert Marder, MD, CMSL, MD, CMSL.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Medical Staff Leader 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
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- News and briefs: Oklahoma Osteopathic Association against residency bill change
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- E-mailed
-
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Q&A tackles coding questions about injections and infusions
- Joint Commission Center announces handoff communication solutions
- Inside best practice: Reduce patient falls with a stoplight
- Identify modifiable risk factors to prevent patient falls
- Hospitalist-surgeon comanagement has no effect on outcomes
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- Case Management Monthly, June 2012
- Searched
