DATA BANK REPORTS
Costa v. Leavitt, No. 4:05CV3248 (D. Neb. July 26, 2006)
The United States District Court for the District of
Nebraska reviewed the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' ("DHHS")
refusal to void a National Practitioner Data Bank ("NPDB") report
and, in the end, overruled that decision, holding that DHHS acted arbitrarily
and capriciously. In this case, a physician withdrew his application for reappointment
and surrendered his privileges following a quality assurance meeting at which
three of the physician's cases were discussed, as well as a meeting of the
hospital's medical executive committee, which voted to deny the physician's
application. The hospital filed a Data Bank report, stating that the physician
resigned while under investigation for issues related to competence and professional
conduct (in the form of poor interaction with nurses). The physician challenged
the report, but DHHS upheld it, finding that the evidence supported that the
physician was under investigation when he resigned. The physician sought review
from the federal district courts, arguing that the hospital's quality assurance
meeting was not an "investigation" and,
therefore, the physician's surrender of privileges following that meeting was
not reportable. The United States District Court for the District of Nebraska
agreed with the physician and held that the quality assurance meeting was not
an investigation. In addition, the court held that the hospital failed to substantiate
that the medical staff voted to reject Dr. Costa's application for reappointment
because of concerns about his competency and conduct, noting that the minutes
of the executive committee meeting did not mention such concerns. In the absence
of evidence showing that the executive committee's decision was based on conduct
that may adversely affect patient care, the court held that the Data Bank report
was inappropriate.