"Medical Peer Review" is a process for evaluating the professional work of physicians. It began as part of various efforts to weed incompetent doctors from the medical profession. Congress strengthened that oversight by enacting the "Health Care Quality Improvement Act". Because of HCQIA, doctors evaluating colleagues through adequate peer review cannot have any judgment for money entered against them based on damages their participation in the process arguably caused. However, HCQIA is sometimes used, "not to improve the quality of medical care, but to leave a doctor who was unfairly treated without any viable remedy." An attorney isolated three (3) reasons for medical peer review in his experience. In his view they are used: . by economic competitors for financial reasons; . in retaliation against the physician for not 'playing ball' in one manner or another (economic or otherwise); or . in retaliation for the physician raising concerns about other physicians' care and seeking to have those providers' outcomes reviewed. So individual physicians as well as their patients and potential patients must ponder whether immunity through HCQIA does more harm than good. What do you think: Should doctors pay money for the harm they cause if they do a bad job evaluating other doctors
No comments yet.join the discussion
ldhrgcih, Latvia3 years ago What is your last name: zeXkHzlxMSt
Should doctors pay money for the harm they cause if they do a bad job evaluating other doctors: ZkwX3U iuaptgbhnyys, vrgswynsxxao, qmbykglzzslf, http://ttwjlpnumfgd.com/
US State: Pennsylvania
Microsoft OEM Software, Ukraine3 years ago What is your last name: sdqTNurTeVQVEOAhGlG
Should doctors pay money for the harm they cause if they do a bad job evaluating other doctors: paLrUK Thanks-a-mundo for the article post.Really looking forward to read more. Keep writing.
US State: Missouri
Bill, United States5 years ago What is your last name: Sexton
Should doctors pay money for the harm they cause if they do a bad job evaluating other doctors: Yes, I think they should be held acountable. There is no room for error when it comes to the well being of a person that puts their trust in you. Both parties should take responsibility if something happens. Both the evaluating doctor and the doctor being evaluated know the risks involved. Both should be prepared before they make the choice to proceed. Both are responsible.
US State: Florida
There are no highlights yet.