News spotlight: CMS' proposed hospital staffing revisions get cool reception
Nurse Leader Weekly, January 9, 2012
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Nurse Leader Weekly!
A rule proposed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to allow changes in the governance structure and medical staffing at hospitals has little support among the more than 100 public comments submitted.
The rule is part of an extensive CMS review of the entire set of Conditions of Participation (CoP) that hospitals must meet to participate as deemed hospitals in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. CoP requirements have been reviewed and revised on an ad hoc basis, but this is the first time in many years that CMS has undertaken a retrospective review of the CoP.
The proposed revisions fall into several broad categories, including governance, staffing, care plans, medications, infection control, and transplant organ recovery. Among the specific proposals:
- Allow one governing body to oversee multiple hospitals in a single healthcare system
- Allow hospitals to grant privileges to physicians and non-physicians to practice within their state's scope of practice regardless of whether they are appointed to the hospital's medical staff
- Revise nursing services requirements to allow hospitals to develop either a stand-alone nursing care plan or an overall interdisciplinary care plan
- Allow hospitals to set up a program so patients or a support person can self-administer hospital-issued medications as well as the patient's own medications brought into the hospital
- Eliminate the requirement that a dedicated log of infection incidents be maintained and instead allow hospitals to develop their own tracking systems
- Eliminate the blood typing requirement performed by transplant centers before organ recovery takes place
To read the rest of this free article, click here.
Source: HealthLeaders Media
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Nurse Leader Weekly!
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
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- State medical board will hear unprofessional charges against OB-GYN
- The debate continues: Nurses who reported physician to the Texas Medical Board file federal appeal
- 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
