If Roth Were a Doctor: Physician Reputation under the HCQIA

2004 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillermo A. Montero
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Data Bank ◽  
Quality Of Healthcare ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Disciplinary Action ◽  
Health Care Quality Improvement

Hospitals in the United States rely on peer review committees to make credentialing decisions and to conduct ongoing evaluations of all medical care, thereby ensuring the quality of the physicians they employ. Physicians, however, may be reluctant to serve on peer review committees for fear of retaliatory litigation. In response, and in an effort to improve the quality of healthcare in the United States, Congress passed the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 (“HCQIA”).Congress designed the HCQIA to improve the quality of healthcare in two ways. First, it increased the effectiveness of peer review by providing review committees with immunity from lawsuits filed in response to professional review actions. Second, it authorized the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to create the National Practitioner's Data Bank (“NPDB”). Any disciplinary action taken by a review committee must, as a condition to immunity, be reported for listing in the NPDB.

Quality Assurance Implications of Federal Peer Review Laws: The Health Care Quality Improvement Act and the National Practitioner Data Bank

1992 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Snelson
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Data Bank ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Bad Faith ◽  
Health Care Quality Improvement ◽  
National Practitioner Data Bank

Patrick v. Burget, the landmark peer review case holding physicians liable under federal antitrust law for substantial damages caused by bad faith peer review, gave rise to the Health Care Quality Improvement Act. As shown in the recent decision in Austin v. McNamara, the Act's conditional immunities may promote peer review. However, the Act also created the National Practitioner Data Bank, which may have a chilling effect on peer review. The quality assurance implications of each of these federal legal developments is analyzed.

The Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986: Its History, Provisions, Applications and Implications

1990 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 453-498
Author(s):  
Susan L. Horner
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Data Bank ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Close Monitoring ◽  
Health Care Quality Improvement

Congress granted qualified immunity from liability for peer review participation to physicians, osteopaths and dentists, created a national practitioner data bank to track inept, incompetent or unprofessional physicians, and enacted procedural rules for due process, privilege restrictions, and reporting and disbursement of information. The Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 is now in full force, and peer review participants are anxious to cloak themselves with immunity from actions brought by health care professionals. Although its goals are worthy, HCQIA's effects remain to be seen. Serious loopholes appear to exist, warranting close monitoring and possibly early amendment of the Act. Cautious judicial assessment is needed, in order to prevent not only circumvention of the Act's requirements by artful litigants, but also use of the national data bank by health care entities as a pretext for denying privileges and escaping antitrust liability.

scholarly journals Association of patients’ perception of quality of healthcare received and colorectal cancer screening uptake: An analysis of two national surveys in the United States

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karan Chawla ◽  
Angesom Kibreab ◽  
Victor & Scott ◽  
Edward L. Lee ◽  
Farshad Aduli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
United States ◽  
Healthcare Delivery ◽  
Quality Of Healthcare ◽  
Healthcare Services ◽  
The United States ◽  
Crc Screening ◽  
Fair Poor ◽  
National Trends

Objective: It is unknown whether patients’ ratings of the quality of healthcare services they receive truly correlate with the quality of care from their providers. Understanding this association can potentiate improvement in healthcare delivery. We evaluated the association between patients’ ratings of the quality of healthcare services received and uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Subject and Methods: We used two iterations of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) of adults in the United States. HINTS 2007 (4,007 respondents; weighted population=75,397,128) evaluated whether respondents were up-to-date with CRC screening while HINTS 4 cycle 3 (1,562 respondents; weighted population=76,628,000) evaluated whether participants had ever received CRC screening in the past. All included respondents from both surveys were at least 50 years of age, had no history of CRC, and had rated the quality of healthcare services that they had received at their healthcare provider’s office in the previous 12 months. Results: HINTS 2007 data showed that respondents who rated their healthcare as good, or fair/poor were significantly less likely to be up to date with CRC screening compared to those who rated their healthcare as excellent. We found comparable results from analysis of HINTS 4 cycle 3 data with poorer uptake of CRC screening as the healthcare quality ratings of respondents’ reduced. Conclusion: Our study suggested that patients who reported receiving lower quality of healthcare services were less likely to have undergone and be compliant with CRC screening recommendations. It is important to pay close attention to patient feedback surveys in order to improve healthcare delivery.

New Paths to Professional Nursing: Using Encouragement to Prepare a Minority Workforce to Enter the Nursing Profession

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 158-166
Author(s):  
Elisheba Haqq-Stevens ◽  
Kathleen E. Zavotsky ◽  
Sarah Kelly ◽  
Christopher Duffy ◽  
Claudia Pagani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Academic Success ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Personal Support ◽  
Professional Nursing ◽  
Professional Nurses

The current professional nursing workforce in the United States is predominantly White and female, even though minorities compose 33% of the national population (Travers, Smaldone, & Cohn, 2015). Minority patients are more effectively cared for when their particular cultural milieu is taken into consideration as part of their health care plan (Sullivan, 2004). According to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), health care quality remains suboptimal for diverse populations in the United States because some individuals do not receive quality care or do not believe their values are honored or respected (AHRQ, 2016). Minority professional nurses are necessary to address the racial and ethnic disparities in health care. Robert Wood Johnson Barnabas Health (RWJBH), in collaboration with Rutgers University School of Nursing (RUSON), implemented New Paths to Professional Nursing (NPPN) to increase the number of minority professional nurses in practice at RWJBH. The program provided financial resources as well as infrastructural, group, and personal support for RWJBH minority employees who desired to complete prerequisites to enter RUSON. The academic success of the employees who participated in NPPN was attributed to a unique combination of financial assistance and support and encouragement. The purpose of this article is to describe in detail the development of the program and the effective encouragement strategies that have led to success for NPPN minority student/employees. This article examines, defines, and illustrates particular types of effective encouragement and suggests that this encouragement was the key to success for the NPPN minority students.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document