JCAHO delays new medical staff requirement until 2007
Medical Staff Leader Connection, May 23, 2006
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Medical Staff Leader Connection!
The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) announced that the implementation of the new requirement for Medical Staff standard MS.1.20 has been delayed until January 2007. The JCAHO closed a field review of MS.1.20 in early March 2006 addressing what information must be included in hospital bylaws versus that which may be included in supplemental documents, such as manuals and policies.
The standard is expected to undergo a second field review in late summer to address hospital concerns about requiring extensive review of existing medical staff bylaws and other documents.
The JCAHO's Standards and Survey Procedures Committee will provide additional input for the field review at its July 17 meeting, and a possible implementation date will be determined at that time, the National Association of Medical Staff Services (NAMSS) reports on its Web site.
Under the standard, the new Element of Performance (EP.19) would require that the medical staff and the governing body agree on the following:
-
the issues that must be addressed in the medical staff bylaws
-
the criteria used to identify the issues that must be addressed in the medical staff bylaws
-
the process used for joint adoption/approval of other issues that are addressed in the rules, regulations and policies
The proposed EP evoked serious concerns from the field, which sees the new requirement as prescriptive and burdensome for the fact that it requires an extensive review of existing medical staff bylaws and other documents.
The JCAHO stated on its Web site that delaying implementation allows further exploration and possible modifications that would address these concerns. MS.1.20 originated from the 2004 reformatting of the standards. Following confusion in the field regarding the intent of MS.1.20, EP.19 was developed.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Medical Staff Leader Connection!
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- HIPAA Q&A: Answering service messages
- News and briefs: Oklahoma Osteopathic Association against residency bill change
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- State medical board will hear unprofessional charges against OB-GYN
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- E-mailed
-
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Are your workforce members texting PHI?
- Don't let these sentinel events trigger falsely
- Arkansas woman convicted for HIPAA violation
- Q/A: Coding infusions to correct low potassium levels
- Q&A: Coding for protein malnutrition
- 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
- Searched
