This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Schneider, K. C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Schneider, K. C. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Ethical Issues Associated with Peer Review in Medicare

Health Care Financing Administration, Dallas, Texas 75202

Delegation of Medicare peer review authority to hospital committees contributed to the failure of Professional Standards Review Organizations. The financial incentives of prospective payment under Diagnosis-Related Groups are associated with partic ularly aggressive hospital-based review and ethical tensions between attending physicians, medical staff committees, and hospital administration. Peer Re view Organizations (PROs) are expected to mediate as well as monitor in this environment, but PROs are harshly judged in turn by the "SuperPRO," which finds them too permissive, and by administrative law judges who overturn the majority of their denials on appeal. Although PRO deliberations are held confi dential, release of denial statistics and hospital-spe cific mortality information raises serious concerns.

American Journal of Medical Quality, Vol. 3, No. 2, 37-41 (1988)
DOI: 10.1177/0885713x8800300203


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?