Friday, March 16, 2018

Weekly Roundup: Peer Review, OPPE, and FPPE

Featured content: Peer review quality measurement and process standardization

In the second half of the 20th century, concepts and methods for quality measurement and improvement changed dramatically. In the 1960s and 1970s, peer review was mainly based on clinical audits, which took a clinical outcome, such as mortality, and inspected medical records to determine if the standards of care were met. These audits were considered a minimalist approach to meeting The Joint Commission standards and coincided with a hospital quality culture that, at the time, did not see a need for an extensive quality evaluation system.

Leadership insight: Orlando Health discusses its methods for treating foreign nationals

Shortly after the Pulse nightclub shooting on June 12, 2016, Orlando Health hospital reported that some of the first people to contact them were representatives from foreign consulates. Due to its unique location and proximity to Disney World, Universal Studios, and Sea World it was highly likely that some of the shooting victims receiving treatment in the hospital could have been international residents.

Heard this week

Free resource: Prepare for practitioner pushback

Don’t be surprised if practitioners push back or give defensive responses about potential performance issues identified during professional practice evaluation. This free resource provides a few typical examples of complaints that practitioners may offer during the course of an evaluation, along with some tips on how to turn the critiques into productive feedback.

Quick tip: When my case is selected for peer review, what is the process?

Because peer review is a medical staff–led initiative, the specific process varies between organizations. At our hospital, when a practitioner’s performance in a particular case raises concerns, the peer review coordinator (who has a clinical background) receives an initial request for peer review, at which point he or she opens a peer review case. The coordinator then writes a case summary for the prospective reviewer, outlining the relevant clinical events. He or she also notifies the director of medical staff services, the peer review chair, the practitioner flagged for review, and, when appropriate, the relevant department chair. All notifications are strictly confidential.

 

New Content: Members Only

APP privileging: Clarifying what they can do, collaborative practice agreements, and switching specialties

Published 3/14/18

The number of advanced practice professionals (APP) applying for hospital and ambulatory privileges is rising rapidly as physician shortages grow. However, regulations and internal standards governing APPs’ work remain variable. Some states grant advanced practice registered nurses full practice authority, while others permit narrower scopes of service and require a physician to provide oversight through a collaborative or supervisory agreement. The vast majority of states require physician assistants (PA) to work under such arrangements. To complicate matters, healthcare institutions may impose stricter practice parameters than those levied by their state.

The evolving role of APPs and their benefit to residents

Published 3/12/18

Today’s healthcare environment is ever-shifting, often making it difficult for providers to keep up. However, the incentives to do so remain high, especially with the continuing physician shortage. As of 2016, the number of nurse practitioners (NP) has increased by 23% and the number of physician assistants (PA) has gone up by 36%, yet both groups continue to be underrepresented on medical staff teams. The specialized training and unique perspectives of advanced practice professionals (APP) make them an invaluable asset, to physicians and residents alike. But do residents develop working relationships with their APPs, and if so, are they beneficial?

 

CRC Announcements

Help us plan our next book

What would you like to see included in the following book: The Credentialing Resource Center’s Top Tools and Forms of 2018. This book would be a compilation of the CRC expert community’s favorite field-sourced materials, complete with helpful commentary on each chosen resource’s merit and potential applications in the field. Please let us know what types of forms you would like to see included in this book, if you would prefer a hard copy or electronic version, and what type of advice should accompany the forms.

Are you a subject matter expert?

Writing books/columns and speaking on webinars and at seminars are great ways to share your industry knowledge with peers. With the guidance of a solid publishing company, you’ll see your thoughts and tips become beacons to others in your field. We’re always looking for new authors, speakers, and reviewers. For more than 20 years, HCPro has been a leading provider of integrated healthcare information, education, training, and consulting products. Among HCPro’s need-to-know information products are a vast array of books, newsletters, websites, annual webinars, and annual live events.

 

SIGN UP | FORWARD | SPONSOR

 
 

Product Spotlight

 

Contact Us

Karen Kondilis
Managing Editor
Credentialing Resource Center
kkondilis@hcpro.com

HCPro
35 Village Road, Suite 200
Middleton, MA 01949
800-650-6787
www.hcpro.com

For advertising and marketing opportunities with the Credentialing Resource Center, please email dhartley@hcpro.com.

 

 

Career Center

Post your open positions or find your next career move with the HCPro Career Center.