Case Result: Bariatric Surgeon Whose Competency is Questioned Avoids Peer Review, Receives 1-Day Probation

Professional:
Bariatric Surgeon

Primary issue:
Client, a bariatric surgeon employed at a hospital, was to be brought in for peer review due to bad surgical outcomes. The hospital had argued over the doctor’s competence, saying that the surgical the complications were his fault. The surgeon, who was near retirement and sensed the peer review action was a means of being pushed out by his peers, decided to retire instead of having to deal with possibly losing privileges. However, because client was under investigation by the hospital, he was immediately reported to the state. The Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) opened an investigation.

The matter went before the Board of Osteopathic Medicine and Surgery and the Attorney General’s office, who, in discussing and reviewing everything, were under the agreement that the surgeon’s notetaking/documentation was of poor quality and that the hospital’s accusations were not completely true. The Board and Attorney General’s office recommended a third-party evaluation on the surgeon’s skills and documentation, and an evaluation commenced with a national provider specializing in clinical assessments on physicians.

Result:
The report stated that the surgeon’s skills were fine, and suggested that he undergo continuing education for his documentation. Client received a one-day probation and a fine.

Areas of Law:
Administrative Complaints and Hearings
Staff Privileges, Credentialing and Peer Review

Disclaimer:
This information is a sample of our past results. Prospective clients may not obtain the same or similar results. Every case is different and each case must be evaluated and handled on its own merits. The circumstances of your case may differ from the results provided. The information provided has not been reviewed or approved by the State Bar.