Beyond having detailed requirements for membership, privileging criteria, and other applicable policies, FPPE and OPPE for AHPs is needed to provide an initial review of new practitioners and a sustained review of each reappointment application. Best practice is a comparative analysis of OPPE for like practitioners, departments, and/or subspecialty divisions that may be reviewed together.

Artificial intelligence (AI) may hold the key to further advancements in healthcare. For example, AI tools such as note-taking and scan-reading programs have allowed physicians to spend more time with patients and thus foster stronger connections with them. Furthermore, these AI developments have demonstrated the potential to increase productivity, efficiency, and even accuracy when utilized appropriately. Topol suggests that physician burnout may even decrease as a result.

Abstracting meaningful professional practice evaluation data for advanced practice professionals (APP) is often a challenge given the dearth of available clinical activity information. This tool from HighPoint Health System in Gallatin, Tennessee, is a peer review rating form allowing reviewers to identify core privileges and special procedures for the given specialty that may require additional training and certification.

Carol Cairns, CPMSM, CPCS, advisory consultant with The Greeley Company and president of PRO-CON, an Illinois-based medical staff services consulting group, answers the question "If PAs can be trained based on the privileges of their supervisory physician, is this true for nurse practitioners too?"

Telemedicine providers communicate with patients or other caregivers via electronic communications. They will remotely review medical records, render a diagnosis, provide radiologic interpretation, or prescribe treatment, all without ever stepping foot inside the hospital. Because a telemedicine provider does not have direct physical contact with the patient, certain requirements relevant to a bedside clinician may not be applicable. As a result, telemedicine agreements sometimes create special circumstances that derail normal credentialing procedures.

A study that found independent hospital accreditation carries no real benefit for patient outcomes has garnered a formal rebuttal from The Joint Commission, which argues the researchers reached faulty conclusions due to a number of methodological flaws.

Many medical staffs undergo significant redesign of their peer review programs to decrease bias and improve efficiency. While staffs typically adopt well-written policies that reflect those changes, unfortunately these programs commonly drift back to their old ways. This is often because initial leaders of the peer review committee lack understanding, or new leaders who don’t buy into the previous changes take control. An annual review of the policies and procedures with the committee chair, the chief of staff, and the support staff is a good way to keep on course.

The Credentialing Resource Center team would like to thank everyone who made the 2019 CRC Symposium a resounding success. Click here to access our photo gallery featuring snapshots from educational sessions captured during the three-day training extravaganza in Las Vegas.

All healthcare organizations must comply with multiple regulatory and accreditation standards, but making sense of all those requirements is easier said than done. During this 90-minute webinar, expert speaker Carol S. Cairns, CPMSM, CPCS, will break down the credentialing standards of the five accrediting bodies (CMS, The Joint Commission [TJC], the Healthcare Facilities Accreditation Program [HFAP], DNV GL, and the National Committee for Quality Assurance [NCQA]), identify their similarities and differences, and explain how the four-step credentialing approach applies to each agency.