NAMSS asking JCAHO to drop MS.1.20 revisions
Medical Staff Leader Connection, October 4, 2006
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Medical Staff Leader Connection!
The National Association of Medical Staff Services (NAMSS) is urging the JCAHO to discontinue its revisions to Standard MS.1.20, which includes new elements of performance (EP) that would require medical staffs and the governing body to collaborate on the adoption of medical staff bylaws.
According to a draft statement posted on the NAMSS Web site on September 27 (http://www.namss.org/about/news.cfm), the organization believes that "it would benefit quality healthcare and patient safety if JCAHO discontinued its revision of MS.1.20."
NAMSS had previously commented on the proposed revisions, noting that they would "complicate rather than improve current medical staff governance structures."
The NAMSS draft statement criticizes EP 27, which would allow the medical staff as a whole to adopt new bylaws before presenting them to the governing body. The statement calls the EP "vague," and notes that it may be interpreted as requiring 100 percent consensus by the medical staff, or a simple majority of medical staff members, for approval of new bylaws.
NAMSS also urges the JCAHO to clarify in the introduction to the standards that adoption of the proposed revisions to MS.1.20 is voluntary.
The JCAHO will close a third field review of MS.1.20 on October 27. NAMSS has urged its members to comment at the JCAHO Web site (http://www.jointcommission.org/Standards/FieldReviews/fr_ms120.htm).
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
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- News and briefs: Oklahoma Osteopathic Association against residency bill change
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- 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
