IMQ offers customized peer review to assist medical staffs Did you know that the Institute for Medical Quality (IMQ), a subsidiary of the California Medical Association (CMA), offers peer review consultations? IMQ currently offers two types of consultations—a clinical case review or a comprehensive evaluation of a physician’s practice. In both cases, IMQ's physician reviewers are in active practice in the clinical specialty or sub-specialty of the case selected for peer review. These services are customized for each medical staff, group or clinic, with fees based on the scope of services provided. Upon completion, the reviewers create a report detailing their findings and recommendations. Clinical Case Review IMQ’s clinical case review consultation is an off-site patient chart review and provides an objective evaluation of the clinical practice of one or more physician members of a hospital medical staff through peer review of selected cases. Comprehensive Peer Review IMQ’s comprehensive peer review consultation is custom-designed to assess the quality of care and services provided by one or more physicians. This program is valuable to physicians and medical staffs who identify a need for a peer review by an outside, objective party. This on-site visit is by two experienced physicians, unaffiliated with the physician or facility, who represent appropriate clinical specialties. IMQ is also developing a program to offer ongoing peer/clinical case review for facilities that want established peer/chart review but do not have the providers available to conduct these reviews. Please contact IMQ if you are interested in this type of review. For more information, visit www.imq.org. Contact: Leslie Anne Iacopi,(415) 882-5167 or liacopi@imq.org. August 8, 2016 General IMQ, Institute for Medical Quality, Peer Review, Hospital Medical Staff, Medical Staff 0 0 Comment Read More »
IMQ offers judicial review service to hospitals In the case of certain disciplinary actions, physicians are entitled by California law to a fair hearing by their peers. The California Medical Association's Institute for Medical Quality's (IMQ) Judicial Review program helps hospitals meet that requirement by providing qualified, independent physicians to serve on panels. Hospitals sometimes struggle to create unbiased judicial review panels and often have difficulty finding physicians without any perceived conflict of interest who are available to serve on consecutive days. IMQ meets that need by providing three or more qualified, independent physician panelists to hear evidence and, based on information presented during the hearings, participate in post-hearing deliberations and the creation of a final report under guidance of the hearing officer. Panelists are of the same or a similar specialty as the physician being reviewed. This service helps hospitals complete panels efficiently and promptly. The IMQ Judicial Review Program is seeing an increased demand for its services. To meet this demand, IMQ is recruiting more physicians to serve as judicial review panelists. Potential candidates must hold an unrestricted California medical license and be either in active practice in California or retired from active medical practice for no more than two years. For additional information on IMQ’s Judicial Review service or on becoming a physician panelist, please contact Leslie Iacopi, (415) 882-5167 or liacopi@imq.org. September 8, 2015 General Peer Review, Institute for Medical Quality 0 0 Comment Read More »
IMQ offers two types of peer review to assist medical staffs The California Medical Association’s Institute for Medical Quality (IMQ) now provides two types of peer review services for medical staffs, including a clinical review of individual cases as well as a comprehensive evaluation of a physician’s entire practice. These services are customized for each medical staff, group or clinic, with fees based on the scope of services provided. IMQ peer review services are most helpful when the medical staff’s peer review body, with the consent of the subject physician, has freely sought such services as an aid to its own peer review process, not to override or to supplant that process. IMQ Clinical Case Review consultations are conducted by two physicians of the appropriate specialty who have no conflicts of interest, with a confidential report presented to the organization at the end of the review. The report offers an objective evaluation of the clinical practice of one or more physician members of a hospital medical staff or medical group through peer review of selected cases. This consultation is intended as a helpful adjunct to a medical staff’s quality assessment and improvement process. It is most appropriate when a medical staff has performed peer review, but requires assistance to determine if the quality of care meets current professional standards. For a Comprehensive Peer Review consultation, two physicians of a relevant specialty who practice in another geographic area assess the quality of care and services provided by one or more physicians, who must consent in advance to the consultation. It is most appropriate when a medical staff has performed peer review, but requires a broad assessment of a physician’s practice. It also may be used when a physician raises concerns about the conclusions from medial staff’s peer review. Generally, the consultation begins with an on-site review of medical records selected by the organization and by the IMQ consultants. It continues with interviews with the involved physician(s), appropriate medical staff or medical group leadership, and key employees of the organization. The consultants also assess relevant credentials documents and quality-related data, then create a confidential report documenting their findings. For more information, visit the IMQ website on Peer Review Consultations. For more information about external peer review see CMA On-Call document #5205, “External Peer Review.” CMA On-Call documents are available free to members at CMA's members-only website. Nonmembers can purchase On-Call documents for $2 per page. April 8, 2015 General Institute for Medical Quality, Medical Staff, Peer Review, IMQ 0 0 Comment Read More »
CMA files amicus brief in physician whistle-blower case Last week, the California Medical Association (CMA) and the American Medical Association (AMA) filed an amicus curiae brief in the California Supreme Court to urge for broad protection of physician whistleblowers in hospitals. The brief focuses on a medical staff physician’s rights as a whistleblower under Health & Safety Code section 1278.5. In the case, Fahlen v. Sutter Central Valley Hospitals et al., the plaintiff physician alleged that his staff privileges were terminated in retaliation for reporting nursing errors and insubordination to the hospital. He sued the hospital under section 1278.5, which provides that any medical staff member who suffers retaliation can sue for damages and reinstatement of privileges. The statute also creates a presumption, which applies in the case, that adverse action taken within 120 days of a whistleblower complaint was retaliatory. The defendant hospital argued, however, that the action under section 1278.5 was improper because the alleged retaliation involves an adverse peer review decision. The hospital claims that the physician instead must first try to overturn the termination of his privileges through a writ process in which the physician faces evidentiary hurdles and a presumption that the peer review action was correct. Only after that writ process, according to the hospital, can the physician pursue a whistleblower claim. CMA and AMA argue in their amicus brief that physician whistleblower protection is too important to be subsumed under the peer review "exhaustion requirement." They point out that the Legislature provided all health care workers in a hospital the same level of broad and immediate whistleblower protection in order to encourage reporting of patient safety issues in hospitals. Requiring physicians to go through a protracted writ process only thwarts this public policy and effectively denies physicians protection under section 1278.5. The amicus brief asks the state's high court to hold that the peer review "exhaustion requirement" does not apply to whistleblower actions. Click here to read the brief. Contact: CMA's legal information line, (800) 786-4262 or legalinfo@cmanet.org. July 25, 2013 General Hospitals and Health Facilities, Peer Review, Legal Advocacy 0 0 Comment Read More »
