Issue link: https://viewer.e-digitaledition.com/i/332636
P EER REVIEW, WHICH includes ut i l i z at ion re v ie w, qu a l it y improvement, credentialing, and corrective action, is one of the most impor ta nt f unctions a Medical Staff performs. To assure the effectiveness and integrity of the peer review process, which ultimately ben- efits patients, Ohio law has long held that proceedings and records within the scope of hospital peer review are privileged and confidential, and are not subject to discovery or the introduction into evidence in any civil action. Traditionally, each hospital that per- formed peer review, particularly if the result adversely affected a physician's membership or privileges, jealously guarded all information presented to, or generated by, the peer review commit- tee. Out of concern for jeopardizing the statutory privilege, hospitals generally refused to share peer review informa- tion, even with a ffiliated hospita ls within the same health care system. These barriers, while understandable and legitimate, ultimately blocked the exchange of information, keeping each hospital insular, despite the need for them to address common issues of quality care, physician competency, and professional conduct. In response to evolving health care, including the rise of hospitals within health care systems and the creation of accountable ca re orga nizations, the Ohio Genera l Assembly passed Amended Substitute House Bill 123, which became effective on May 20, 2014. The Bill expands the definition of a "health care entity" and addresses the reality that hospitals within and outside of health care systems and ACOs need to share peer review documents to assure effective peer review. T he Bill a mends Rev ised Code, §2305.25 by including "accountable care organizations" and a "group of hospitals that are owned, sponsored, or managed by a single entity" in the definition of "health care entity." The new law further expands the scope of protection for peer review committees of health care entities by adding the follow ing prov isions in §2305.252: The release of information, docu- ments, or records that were produced or presented during proceedings of a peer review committee or created to docu- ment the proceedings does not affect the confidentiality of any other infor- mation, document, or records produced or presented during those proceedings or created to document them. Only the information, documents, or records actually released cease to be privileged under this section. Nothing in this section precludes hea lt h ca re ent it ies f rom sha r ing information, documents, or records that were produced or presented during proceedings of a peer review committee or created to document them as long as the information, documents, or records are used only for peer review purposes. The first paragraph allows a peer review committee of a hospital or health care entity to release some, but not all, peer review documents (which may be in its best interest, if the hospital were named in a lawsuit alleging negligent credentialing), without waiving the priv ilege for a ll non-relea sed peer review information. In other words, a peer rev iew committee ca n now select what to release. No longer will releasing a peer review document result in the waiver of privilege for all peer review documents. The second paragraph facilitates a hospital's ability to share (obtain and disclose) relevant peer review informa- tion with other hospitals and healthcare entities within or outside the same system, so long as hospital or health care entity that obtains the information uses it for peer review purposes. What the new law did not change, and what remains essential to peer review, is the statutory immunity that protects physicians participating in peer review, including peer review committee members and physicians who prov ide information to, or on behalf of, a peer review committee. J o e Fe l t e s i s a n a t t o r n e y w i t h Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs in Canton and a member of its Health & Medicine Practice Group. He is also the managing partner of Buckingham Canton. For more information about the law firm, go to www.bdblaw.com or email Feltes at JFeltes@BDBLAW.com. ■ By Joseph J. Feltes, JD Ohio Broadens Peer Review Statutes ++++++++++++++++++++++++ + +++ + +++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++ BUSINESS SECTION 3 2 | Cleveland/Akron/Canton MD NEWS ■ M D N E W S . CO M ■ J U LY/AU G U S T 2 0 1 4