100% de satisfacción garantizada Inmediatamente disponible después del pago Tanto en línea como en PDF No estas atado a nada 4.2 TrustPilot
logo-home
Examen

CPMSM - Key Credentialing Cases UPDATED ACTUAL Exam Questions and CORRECT Answers

Puntuación
-
Vendido
-
Páginas
6
Grado
A+
Subido en
17-03-2025
Escrito en
2024/2025

CPMSM - Key Credentialing Cases UPDATED ACTUAL Exam Questions and CORRECT Answers Darling v. Charleston Memorial Community Hospital - CORRECT ANSWER have proper supervision; Case set aside the Charitable Immunity Doctrine. - Failure to Hospital liable for negligent treatment resulting in amputation of teenager's leg nurses failed to monitor; physician failed to consult; hospital claimed that charitable immunity doctrine limited damages to its insurance.

Mostrar más Leer menos
Institución
CPMSM
Grado
CPMSM









Ups! No podemos cargar tu documento ahora. Inténtalo de nuevo o contacta con soporte.

Escuela, estudio y materia

Institución
CPMSM
Grado
CPMSM

Información del documento

Subido en
17 de marzo de 2025
Número de páginas
6
Escrito en
2024/2025
Tipo
Examen
Contiene
Preguntas y respuestas

Temas

Vista previa del contenido

CPMSM - Key Credentialing Cases
UPDATED ACTUAL Exam Questions and
CORRECT Answers
Darling v. Charleston Memorial Community Hospital - CORRECT ANSWER - Failure to
have proper supervision; Case set aside the Charitable Immunity Doctrine.


Hospital liable for negligent treatment resulting in amputation of teenager's leg nurses failed to
monitor; physician failed to consult; hospital claimed that charitable immunity doctrine limited
damages to its insurance.


Johnson v. Misericordia Community Hospital - CORRECT ANSWER - Negligent
credentialing; Failure of initial credentialing process.


Hospital liable to patient injured by physician who had failed to disclose pending malpractice
cases and lied about privileges at other hospitals; should have verified information.


Elam v. College Park Hospital - CORRECT ANSWER - Negligent Credentialing


Hospital liable for podiatrist's negligence; failed to obtain malpractice claims data although
medical records department aware of claims. Podiatrist.


Patrick v. Burget - CORRECT ANSWER - Anti-competitive peer review; HCQIA;
Violation of Federal Anti-trust Laws


Physicians conducted peer review for anti-competitive reasons liable for violating federal anti-
trust laws.


Robinson v. Magovern - CORRECT ANSWER - Hospitals May Determine Proper
Limitation on Competition Within the Hospital and Surrounding Areas - careful and thorough

, adherence to bylaws that contain objective criteria required. Denial of application is not a
restraint of trade.


MD brought antitrust suit because he was denied privileges. Hospital did this based on shortage
of OR space, unfavorable recommendation, failure to publish MD on seven other staffs and
would probably not be able to contribute to hospital teaching program.


Miller v. Eisenhower Medical Center - CORRECT ANSWER - Disruptive Behavior Must
be Patient Care Related


Denial of application based on inability to work with others; no quality of care problems.


Rao v. Auburn General Hospital - CORRECT ANSWER - Disruptive Behavior.
Personality May Be Considered If Affects Ability to Practice or Hospital Operations - personality
problems must affect the workings of the hospital.


Hospital denied privileges to MD after receiving reports from other hospitals on termination/
restriction of privileges. Other hospitals also reported substandard work and emotional instability


Boyd v. Albert Einstein Medical Center - CORRECT ANSWER - Ostensible agency;
MCO liable for practitioners action.


IPA-type HMO advertised as providing medical care held liable for member MD's negligence.


Harrell v. Total Health Care - CORRECT ANSWER - Negligent Credentialing; Failure to
Credential


State law granted immunity to non-profit health plans; MCO not liable for negligent
credentialing.


McClellan v. Health Maintenance Organization of Pennsylvania - CORRECT ANSWER -
Duty to select and monitor providers; Negligent Credentialing; Ostensible Agency.
$10.49
Accede al documento completo:

100% de satisfacción garantizada
Inmediatamente disponible después del pago
Tanto en línea como en PDF
No estas atado a nada


Documento también disponible en un lote

Conoce al vendedor

Seller avatar
Los indicadores de reputación están sujetos a la cantidad de artículos vendidos por una tarifa y las reseñas que ha recibido por esos documentos. Hay tres niveles: Bronce, Plata y Oro. Cuanto mayor reputación, más podrás confiar en la calidad del trabajo del vendedor.
MGRADES Stanford University
Seguir Necesitas iniciar sesión para seguir a otros usuarios o asignaturas
Vendido
1076
Miembro desde
1 año
Número de seguidores
102
Documentos
68972
Última venta
1 día hace
MGRADES (Stanford Top Brains)

Welcome to MGRADES Exams, practices and Study materials Just think of me as the plug you will refer to your friends Me and my team will always make sure you get the best value from the exams markets. I offer the best study and exam materials for a wide range of courses and units. Make your study sessions more efficient and effective. Dive in and discover all you need to excel in your academic journey!

3.8

171 reseñas

5
73
4
30
3
46
2
8
1
14

Recientemente visto por ti

Por qué los estudiantes eligen Stuvia

Creado por compañeros estudiantes, verificado por reseñas

Calidad en la que puedes confiar: escrito por estudiantes que aprobaron y evaluado por otros que han usado estos resúmenes.

¿No estás satisfecho? Elige otro documento

¡No te preocupes! Puedes elegir directamente otro documento que se ajuste mejor a lo que buscas.

Paga como quieras, empieza a estudiar al instante

Sin suscripción, sin compromisos. Paga como estés acostumbrado con tarjeta de crédito y descarga tu documento PDF inmediatamente.

Student with book image

“Comprado, descargado y aprobado. Así de fácil puede ser.”

Alisha Student

Preguntas frecuentes