PROFESSIONPeer review findings ruled open to the publicIn the Courts. By Tanya Albert, amednews staff. July 8/15, 2002. When Kentucky resident David Shipp asked a Medicare peer review organization to investigate the way physicians cared for his wife, the three doctors in the case had a choice: They could consent to release the findings to Shipp or they could respectfully decline. Louisville, Ky., internist Peter Thurman, MD, agreed to send Shipp the findings, and the PRO sent a letter telling Shipp "no quality-of-care concerns were identified." Louisville general surgeon Thomas C. Dedman, MD, and Louisville diagnostic radiologist David M. Jolgren, MD, said they didn't want the peer review information released. The PRO sent Shipp letters explaining that federal law and regulations bar the PRO from releasing the findings without the physicians' consent. The letter went on to tell Mr. Shipp to "be assured" if the PRO did find a problem, it would take "all necessary action," Shipp -- whose wife died of cancer in 1999 -- wasn't satisfied with the PRO response to his request. Now, his quest for satisfaction may take away from physicians the decision on what peer review information is released to patients or their families. Shipp argued that he was entitled to know whether the physicians' care was appropriate. Consumer watchdog group Public Citizen sued -- on his and other Medicare patients' and families' behalf -- saying exactly that. Last summer, a judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia agreed with Shipp. She ruled that patients did have a right to more than an assurance that if something inappropriate was found that all necessary action would be taken. The court said PROs had to let families know the details of their findings.
[...]
Full text of American Medical News content is available to AMA members and paid subscribers.
Copyright 2002 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
|
The doctors are in the house
The AMA's House of Delegates is holding its Interim Meeting Nov. 7-10 in Houston, addressing issues such as health system reform and physician payment. Meeting coverage - Slideshow Feature articlesHealth reform review The Massachusetts experience Litigation stress Being sued is personal as well as professional Comprehensive coverage
Most-viewed
Nov. 9 issueHouse option for public plan wouldn't limit physician pay to Medicare rates New database for out-of-network pay set to replace disputed Ingenix system Columns and series
From the vault: 5 years agoGenetic testing issues land in primary care practices Nov. 8, 2004 
|
SHARE
