Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Core Privileging and Credentialing: Hospitals' Approach to Gynecologic Surgery.

MedStar author(s):

Citation: Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 23(7):1088-1106.e1, 2016 Nov - DecPMID: 27521980Institution: MedStar Washington Hospital CenterDepartment: Obstetrics and Gynecology/Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive SurgeryForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Journal ArticleSubject headings: *Benchmarking | *Credentialing/st [Standards] | *Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/st [Standards] | *Medical Staff Privileges/og [Organization & Administration] | *Robotic Surgical Procedures/st [Standards] | Canada | Cross-Sectional Studies | Demography | Female | Hospitals | HumansYear: 2016 ISSN:

1553-4650

Name of journal: Journal of minimally invasive gynecologyAbstract: CONCLUSION: Considerable variability exists in the criteria used by hospitals for granting and maintaining surgical privileges for gynecologic procedures. Standardization will likely require efforts at a national leadership level.Copyright � 2016 AAGL. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.DESIGN: We conducted a cross-sectional study (Canadian Task Force classification III).INTERVENTION: We examined criteria for designating core gynecologic privileges, credentialing, and other training requirements as well as minimum and annual case numbers for initial granting and maintenance of surgical privileges.MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Major inconsistencies in privileging were found across the 5 institutions. Hospitals varied widely in procedures designated as core versus those requiring advanced training. Institutions greatly contrasted in the case numbers and temporal factors used to define experience. Of particular concern was absent privileging criteria for 38.4% to 76.9% of minor procedures, 26.7% to 46.7% of endoscopic procedures, and 6.67% to 56.7% of major procedures. Initial and maintenance privileging requirements for special procedures (i.e., robotic-assisted surgery) were likewise discrepant, with minimum annual case numbers ranging from 3 to 48 across hospitals.SETTING: Data was obtained from obtained from 5 geographically diverse hospital systems.STUDY OBJECTIVE: Privileging and credentialing requirements are determined by medical staff leadership at the hospital level to ensure clinicians provide safe healthcare services. No standardized guidelines exist for gynecologic surgery. The objective of this study is to examine the variability of the criteria used to grant surgical privileges and credentials for gynecologic procedures at 5 high-volume academic and community-based US hospitals.All authors: Chen B, Emery S, Falcone T, Iglesia C, Margulies R, Park A, Rardin C, Shah N, Siddique MFiscal year: FY2017Digital Object Identifier:

https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2016.08.001

Date added to catalog: 2017-05-24

Holdings ( 1 )
Title notes ( 8 )

Holdings
Item type	Current library	Collection	Call number	Status	Date due	Barcode
Journal Article	MedStar Authors Catalog	Article	27521980	Available		27521980

CONCLUSION: Considerable variability exists in the criteria used by hospitals for granting and maintaining surgical privileges for gynecologic procedures. Standardization will likely require efforts at a national leadership level.

DESIGN: We conducted a cross-sectional study (Canadian Task Force classification III).

INTERVENTION: We examined criteria for designating core gynecologic privileges, credentialing, and other training requirements as well as minimum and annual case numbers for initial granting and maintenance of surgical privileges.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Major inconsistencies in privileging were found across the 5 institutions. Hospitals varied widely in procedures designated as core versus those requiring advanced training. Institutions greatly contrasted in the case numbers and temporal factors used to define experience. Of particular concern was absent privileging criteria for 38.4% to 76.9% of minor procedures, 26.7% to 46.7% of endoscopic procedures, and 6.67% to 56.7% of major procedures. Initial and maintenance privileging requirements for special procedures (i.e., robotic-assisted surgery) were likewise discrepant, with minimum annual case numbers ranging from 3 to 48 across hospitals.

SETTING: Data was obtained from obtained from 5 geographically diverse hospital systems.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Privileging and credentialing requirements are determined by medical staff leadership at the hospital level to ensure clinicians provide safe healthcare services. No standardized guidelines exist for gynecologic surgery. The objective of this study is to examine the variability of the criteria used to grant surgical privileges and credentials for gynecologic procedures at 5 high-volume academic and community-based US hospitals.

English