http://policy.texmed.org/
130.017 Physician Rights and Sham Peer Review:
The Texas Medical Association condemns “sham peer review” and manipulation of medical staff bylaws by hospitals attempting to silence physician concerns for access to quality care at hospitals and advocates against “sham peer review,” manipulation of medical staff bylaws and enforcement of such bylaws, and other tactics that chill or inhibit the ability of staff physicians to advocate for their patients (Res. 401-A-07).
The Texas Medical Association will (1) work to assure that accused physicians are granted reasonable rights and due process for peer review and quality assessment efforts; (2) solicit member input and address issues related to misuse of peer review process or “disruptive physicians” policies by health care facilities or peer review entities; (3) work to educate and inform members about the potential misuse of peer review; and (4) work to end the use of “disruptive physicians” policies which are extended to non-patient care issues, such as economic credentialing, failure to support marketing or business plans of the hospital or health care facility, or are used as a recourse because the physician has raised serious quality or patient safety issues regarding the facility, and their practice (Res. 406-A-07).
Comment:
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Monday, March 14, 2011
A "pro-administration" doctor goes against an "elected" physician commissioner
I think I will deviate from my usual topics, since my Google radar screened a very odd letter article. It is from the State of Washington. The hospital, Valley Medical Center (VMC), is apparently discussing some sort of affiliation with the University of Washington Hospital. VMC is a public hospital (that is, a government entity) which has a democratically-elected Board of Commissioners. One result of the affiliation would be that a bigger governing body rendering the voices of the elected commissioners (including the one the hospital administration is afraid of) less significant. Here is the link to the article:
The doctor (Terence Block) wrote:
"Sadly, elections sometimes are decided by sound bytes and political rants, rather than insight in to the persona and qualifications of the candidate."
"If the affiliation between UW Medicine and VMC comes to pass, the operations of VMC will be guided by five elected Commissioners, five people appointed by the UW in consultation with many of our elected political officials, and three representatives of the most prestigious Medical Center in the Pacific Northwest. Yes, this may dilute Aaron Heide’s influence on the affairs of Valley Medical Center. Judging by his behavior at board meetings these past 14 months, I think that may be a good result."
What? Is it only my imagination? Doctor Block indicates that, since the voters did not elect a commissioner that goes along with the hospital administration, the remedy is to add governing members who are not elected, to dilute the effect of that elected commissioner, and any others in the future that may be democratically-elected. Looking further, I found an earlier letter written by Aaron Heide, which completes the picture:
I think this could be one more hospital on the radar screen to see if it targets "undesirable" doctors.
Concerns about Valley Medical commissioner remain | Letter
The doctor (Terence Block) wrote:
"Sadly, elections sometimes are decided by sound bytes and political rants, rather than insight in to the persona and qualifications of the candidate."
"If the affiliation between UW Medicine and VMC comes to pass, the operations of VMC will be guided by five elected Commissioners, five people appointed by the UW in consultation with many of our elected political officials, and three representatives of the most prestigious Medical Center in the Pacific Northwest. Yes, this may dilute Aaron Heide’s influence on the affairs of Valley Medical Center. Judging by his behavior at board meetings these past 14 months, I think that may be a good result."
What? Is it only my imagination? Doctor Block indicates that, since the voters did not elect a commissioner that goes along with the hospital administration, the remedy is to add governing members who are not elected, to dilute the effect of that elected commissioner, and any others in the future that may be democratically-elected. Looking further, I found an earlier letter written by Aaron Heide, which completes the picture:
Valley Medical commissioner concerned and calls for action regarding democratic process | Letter
I think this could be one more hospital on the radar screen to see if it targets "undesirable" doctors.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Does Your Hospital Abuse the Peer Review Process?
Dear Doctor,
If your hospital abuses the hospital review process and tries to enforce disciplinary actions unfairly, wouldn't it be a good idea that other physicians know so that, hopefully, new physicians be careful not to become victims. Don't stay in a rotten place. When you leave, you'll stink.
You can reach me in one of the following ways:
1. Follow me on Twitter, I follow you, and you can direct message me.
2. If you have a Facebook account, direct message me.
3. You may make a comment on this blog if you wish. The content of any comment is the responsibility of the posting person, since I do not verify content of comments.
If your hospital abuses the hospital review process and tries to enforce disciplinary actions unfairly, wouldn't it be a good idea that other physicians know so that, hopefully, new physicians be careful not to become victims. Don't stay in a rotten place. When you leave, you'll stink.
You can reach me in one of the following ways:
1. Follow me on Twitter, I follow you, and you can direct message me.
2. If you have a Facebook account, direct message me.
3. You may make a comment on this blog if you wish. The content of any comment is the responsibility of the posting person, since I do not verify content of comments.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Questions Defying Answers
There are some things in life that bother me a lot when I cannot understand. When laws and regulations are counterproductive and unjust, where to go?
- I cannot understand why regulators and lawyers in the US have put in place a peer review process that is very clearly lacking in the equivalent of an impartial jury.
- Why competitiors and those who may have an interest in eliminating a physician are given so much unbalanced power and have the final word, in effect?
- Why is the process so highly judicial that a physician may be targeted but have no financial means to protect himself/herself and, therefore, easily removed from practice?
- I cannot understand why such a process, that is therefore open to corruption, is left untouched
- I cannot understand why the American Medical Association, the American College of Surgeons, etc, etc, have been so soft in this while seeing their own members being victimized
- I cannot understand why the outcome of an inherently corrupt and unfair process has to be reported to the National Practitioners Data Bank as if it were a fair outcome? Isn't that defaming by definition, even though the goal was to protect patients?
- I cannot understand why a physician has less rights in defending her/his career than a criminal does in defending himself/herself
- I cannot understand why there is absolutely no mandate that an educational peer review process exist, while punitive panels are set up to sentence to death good physicians' careers.
There is something wrong with this picture. Physicians in the US are under the mercy of the politics and the whims and conscience of their colleagues. Patients are not safer in such an environment. Since the results of those execution tribunals (peer review committees) are so devastating, the select favorites will never be subjected to them, while the solo, the foreign graduate, the newcomer, the young (essentially the vulnerable), will more likely be the target. And the victim may even be the better doctor than the ones who are judging. Too bad that physicians do not have representation that stands strong on issues like those. The American medical Association is just too soft on that issue.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Monday, December 20, 2010
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Doctors .. Ganging-Up
Workplace mobbing and ganging up against someone for whatever reason is a sad reality of life. The current state of the peer review process provides a handy tool to achieve so among members of the medical profession. I read the following comment, published in the Yakima Herald Internet edition http://www.yakima-herald.com/stories/2010/11/24/11-24-10-letters-to-the-editor-online-only-edition
Regardless whether the details are accurate or not, the message is that doctors can gang up against another who can be regarded as an unwelcome addition to the staff. The reasons can be any number of possibilities, but the results can be devastating to a physician.
11/24/10 Letters to the Editor, online-only edition
Yakima Herald-Republic
Dr. Smigaj will be missed
To the editor -- I felt heartsick and despairing when I read the Nov. 11 article in your newspaper that Dr. Diana Smigaj was giving up her OB practice in Yakima. Dr. Smigaj is a wonderful and very competent OB who has delivered many babies over her 15 years of practice in Yakima. Because of her specialty, she handled many high-risk births as well as normal/regular deliveries. In addition to her clinical expertise, Dr. Smigaj is a genuine, caring, kind and determined woman who is very dedicated to her patients, to their families, and to her staff. She has assembled a clinical staff of very capable women -- nurse-midwives, nurses, physician assistant and technicians who share her mission and values of supportive and good medical care.
Many women, including myself, prefer a woman physician especially for birthing and gynecological care. This preference is nothing more or less than a personal preference.
I recruited and hired Dr. Smigaj to practice in Yakima when the board of St. Elizabeth Medical Center decided to reopen obstetric services in 1995. Most OBs in Yakima and Memorial Hospital opposed the birthing center. Even prior to her arrival in Yakima, there was resistance to Dr. Smigaj and one OB-GYN told her that he was opposed to her being hired by St. Elizabeth and she would be deeply resented if she came to Yakima this way. Dr. Smigaj came despite this warning. It was soon apparent that these warnings were indicative of things to come.
I believe the Yakima Valley benefits greatly from having Dr. Smigaj and her staff, and I feel sadness for her but also for the good folks in the Yakima Valley who need her expertise.
BARBARA HOOD
Louisville, Ky.
Regardless whether the details are accurate or not, the message is that doctors can gang up against another who can be regarded as an unwelcome addition to the staff. The reasons can be any number of possibilities, but the results can be devastating to a physician.
11/24/10 Letters to the Editor, online-only edition
Yakima Herald-Republic
Dr. Smigaj will be missed
To the editor -- I felt heartsick and despairing when I read the Nov. 11 article in your newspaper that Dr. Diana Smigaj was giving up her OB practice in Yakima. Dr. Smigaj is a wonderful and very competent OB who has delivered many babies over her 15 years of practice in Yakima. Because of her specialty, she handled many high-risk births as well as normal/regular deliveries. In addition to her clinical expertise, Dr. Smigaj is a genuine, caring, kind and determined woman who is very dedicated to her patients, to their families, and to her staff. She has assembled a clinical staff of very capable women -- nurse-midwives, nurses, physician assistant and technicians who share her mission and values of supportive and good medical care.
Many women, including myself, prefer a woman physician especially for birthing and gynecological care. This preference is nothing more or less than a personal preference.
I recruited and hired Dr. Smigaj to practice in Yakima when the board of St. Elizabeth Medical Center decided to reopen obstetric services in 1995. Most OBs in Yakima and Memorial Hospital opposed the birthing center. Even prior to her arrival in Yakima, there was resistance to Dr. Smigaj and one OB-GYN told her that he was opposed to her being hired by St. Elizabeth and she would be deeply resented if she came to Yakima this way. Dr. Smigaj came despite this warning. It was soon apparent that these warnings were indicative of things to come.
I believe the Yakima Valley benefits greatly from having Dr. Smigaj and her staff, and I feel sadness for her but also for the good folks in the Yakima Valley who need her expertise.
BARBARA HOOD
Louisville, Ky.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)