Sham Peer Review: Consequences and Remedy

Abstract

One of the key pillars for quality assurance of surgeons (and physicians in general) has been the regular review and determination of professional competence by the hospital’s medical executive committee (MEC). A just, equitable and credible peer review process is important to all stakeholders and aspects in healthcare. While a judgment of competence is issued for most practitioners, a much rarer judgement of incompetence is typically ratified by the hospital’s MEC upon completion of a “peer review” process. Adverse outcome leads to disciplinary action and revoking the physician’s hospital privileges. Any adverse privilege action is then reported to the National Practitioner Databank (NPDB), which makes it very difficult for the surgeon/physician to get privileges at any other hospital [1]. Surgeons of all subspecialities are more frequently affected by these punitive actions than non-operative physicians.