QUESTION:
At our hospital members of the Professional Practice Evaluation/Peer Review Committee (“PPE/PRC”) also sit on our Medical Executive Committee (“MEC”).  If a hearing was generated out of the PPE/PRC, could there be an adverse determination as there was significant prior knowledge of an event by MEC members?

OUR ANSWER FROM HORTYSPRINGER ATTORNEY NICK CALABRESE:
These concerns are spot-on!  We strongly recommend that there be as little overlap as possible between the PPE/PRC and the MEC, with the reasons being both practical/operational and legal:

• Hospital and Medical Staff bylaws and policies should be clear that the PPE/PRC has no disciplinary authority – it is a “helping” committee on steroids. This leads to Medical Staff members being more willing to work with the PPE/PRC in a constructive and cooperative way, since it is not cast as MEC disciplinary action.

• If the PPE/PRC can’t fix something and it gets referred to the MEC, the MEC should be an independent and unbiased group who can’t be alleged to have pre-decided the matter prior to conducting a fair and formal investigation.

• Having a good line of demarcation between the PPE/PRC and MEC also helps on the reporting side – less risk of having an intervention have to be reported to the State or National Practitioner Data Bank if there is no overlap/confusion as to who is taking the action.