Horner S L
Colorado State University.
Am J Law Med. 1990;16(4):455-98.
Congress granted qualified immunity from liability for peer review participation to physicians, osteopaths and dentists, created a national practitioner data bank to track inept, incompetent or unprofessional physicians, and enacted procedural rules for due process, privilege restrictions, and reporting and disbursement of information. The Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 is now in full force, and peer review participants are anxious to cloak themselves with immunity from actions brought by health care professionals. Although its goals are worthy, HCQIA's effects remain to be seen. Serious loopholes appear to exist, warranting close monitoring and possibly early amendment of the Act. Cautious judicial assessment is needed, in order to prevent not only circumvention of the Act's requirements by artful litigants, but also use of the national data bank by health care entities as a pretext for denying privileges and escaping antitrust liability.
国会赋予医生、整骨疗法医生和牙医在参与同行评审时享有合格的豁免权，设立了一个全国从业者数据库以追踪不称职、不胜任或不专业的医生，并制定了关于正当程序、特权限制以及信息报告和传播的程序规则。1986年的《医疗保健质量改进法案》现已全面生效，同行评审参与者急于为自己披上免受医疗保健专业人员提起诉讼的豁免权外衣。尽管该法案的目标值得肯定，但其效果仍有待观察。似乎存在严重漏洞，有必要密切监测并可能尽早对该法案进行修订。需要进行谨慎的司法评估，以防止不仅狡猾的诉讼当事人规避该法案的要求，还要防止医疗保健实体将全国数据库用作拒绝特权和逃避反托拉斯责任的借口。
