|
|
|
|
| Lawsuit Pitting Physicians' ASCs vs. Hospitals Appealed to Supreme Court
|
|
When a hospital learns that one of its surgeons intends to build an ASC, what actions may it take to prevent the surgeon from doing so? At what point must those actions stop? The U.S. Supreme Court may answer those questions as early as mid-April.
An appeal filed with the high court argues that a federal court's ruling on the case of Gordon v. Lewistown Hospital, an antitrust lawsuit involving an ophthalmologist and a community hospital, leaves ASCs and physicians vulnerable when facing peer review and during the developmental stages of an ASC.
"The [federal court] has essentially provided hospitals a green light to discipline doctors ... because of their efforts to create options for patients outside of the hospital," says William J. Fishkind, MD, FACS, president of the Outpatient Ophthalmic Surgery Society. The OOSS is among eight professional organizations — including AAASC, FASA and the ACS — petitioning the Supreme Court to hear and overturn the ruling.
"If a hospital wants to be nasty, it can make it impossible for a doctor to open a surgery center," says petitioner Alan D. Gordon, MD.
The case arose after Dr. Gordon was stripped of his privileges by the Lewistown, Pa., hospital due to "competitive behavior," says his lawyer, George M. Sanders, Esq. Before and during Lewistown's disciplinary proceedings, Dr. Gordon had been attempting to open an ASC that would've competed with the hospital. According to a press release issued by AAASC and OOSS, communications with patients and hospital-affiliated personnel led Dr. Gordon to believe that the disciplinary actions were motivated by a desire to prevent him from opening a competing ASC.
"The courts have gone out of their way to point out that Dr. Gordon is an excellent surgeon," says Mr. Sanders, "and that there is no question of his competence. At the same time that Dr. Gordon was in the process of opening his ASC, the hospital was also taking steps to formally oppose those efforts and to limit his competitive activities with patients, none of which occurred in the hospital or with patients being cared for by the hospital."
Lewistown Hospital does not comment on pending litigation, says its lawyer, Susan Lapenta, Esq.
Further coverage of the case will be published in the April issue of Outpatient Surgery Magazine.
|
|
 |
^ Back to Top |
|
|
|
|
| CDC Resumes Ambulatory Surgery Survey
|
|
A lot has changed in the outpatient surgery field since the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conducted its last National Survey of Ambulatory Surgery a decade ago. Hailed as an early source of nationally representative data on ambulatory surgery, the 1996 annual summary is a window on just how far the industry and its providers have come in ten years. The results of the 2006 survey are scheduled for release in 2008, says a CDC representative.
The survey, conducted annually from 1994 through 1996, was halted due to lack of resources. The resumption of the survey, however, will help to fill a major gap in statistical information on surgical procedures in the United States during a time when outpatient surgery became increasingly common and ASCs grew steadily, says the CDC.
The new survey will provide detailed information on a national level about this expanding area of healthcare. When examined alongside data from the CDC's National Hospital Discharge Survey, an inpatient care survey, the data collected from the ambulatory survey will provide a more complete picture of surgery in the United States.
|
|
|
^ Back to Top |
|
|
|
|
| The Doctor Will E-mail You Now
|
|
About 55 percent of patients facing orthopedic procedures will have researched their condition online even before visiting their specialist, according to a paper appearing in the March issue of the Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Given the increasing popularity and accessibility of online health and medical information, the paper's authors suggest that electronic communication might be a boon to patient-physician interaction, but only if it's done accurately, securely and with personal guidance.
"We want our patients to be educated and engaged in managing their own health," says lead author J. Sybil Biermann, MD, associate professor at the University of Michigan Health System's orthopedic surgery department in Ann Arbor, Mich. "Therefore, we need to partner with patients to use this resource to maximum effect."
While Web sites and e-mail messages can answer basic questions and lay a foundation of knowledge on a clinical topic, she writes, personal interaction is still required to refine that knowledge and tailor it to a patient's unique needs.
In addition, providers must keep legal and safety considerations in mind when incorporating these information resources. The confidentiality of patient information must be addressed, first and foremost, and medical information sites should be reviewed for content, accuracy and potential affiliations before patients are referred to them.
"Patients also have a responsibility to consider the source of Internet-based health information," says Dr. Biermann, "and to understand that not all of the information they find will apply to them."
|
|
|
^ Back to Top |
|
|
|
|
| News and Notes
|
|
About 55 percent of patients facing orthopedic procedures will have researched their condition online even before visiting their specialist, according to a paper appearing in the March issue of the Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Given the increasing popularity and accessibility of online health and medical information, the paper's authors suggest that electronic communication might be a boon to patient-physician interaction, but only if it's done accurately, securely and with personal guidance.
"We want our patients to be educated and engaged in managing their own health," says lead author J. Sybil Biermann, MD, associate professor at the University of Michigan Health System's orthopedic surgery department in Ann Arbor, Mich. "Therefore, we need to partner with patients to use this resource to maximum effect."
While Web sites and e-mail messages can answer basic questions and lay a foundation of knowledge on a clinical topic, she writes, personal interaction is still required to refine that knowledge and tailor it to a patient's unique needs.
In addition, providers must keep legal and safety considerations in mind when incorporating these information resources. The confidentiality of patient information must be addressed, first and foremost, and medical information sites should be reviewed for content, accuracy and potential affiliations before patients are referred to them.
"Patients also have a responsibility to consider the source of Internet-based health information," says Dr. Biermann, "and to understand that not all of the information they find will apply to them."
|
|
|
^ Back to Top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
