Candler v. Persaud Medicine Case Study Assignment

Candler v. Persaud Case Study
Name:
Institution:
Course Title:
Instructor:
Date:
Candler v. Persaud Case Study
Background Information on the Case
The Candler v. Persaud Case involved the petition filed by a patient against Candler general Hospital. The patient was referred to a physician named Dr. Freeman in order receive consultation as well as treatment of gallstones about or on February 15, 1990. Having undergone consultation, the physician recommended that such patient should undergo a procedure referred to as laparoscopic laser cholecystectomy. Dr. Freeman was fully granted the privileges of performing such procedure on the patient upon his request to do so. Such privileges were granted to the physician based on the certification from the workshop he had completed earlier on the procedure. Upon performing the procedure on the patient, the patient bled to death. As a result, the patient’s estate’s administrator filed a case alleging that the procedure was negligently performed, resulting to the bleeding and death of the patient. The administrator held that the hospital negligently granted the physician with the privileges of performing the procedure without having established an technique for judging on whether the physician was competent to perform the procedure or not. This research paper sought to provide a description of credentialing issues in Candler v. Persaud Case and the necessary steps that a hospital should take to help ensure that a physician is competent to perform the procedures he or she is requesting.
Credentialing Issues in Candler v. Persaud Case
There are various credentialing issues in the Candler v. Persaud Case. Credentialing refers to the process that entails obtaining, verification, and assessment of a practitioner’s qualification to provide services or care for a certain health care facility. Such credentialing is critical in ensuring accountability and competence. If performed properly, credentialing can protect both the health care organization and the clients. Though credentialing is often associated with expense and time, it is worth the investment in order prevent the occurrence of adverse outcome of event as well as subsequent legal liability to the health care organization. It helps in building quality practitioners to protect the interest of the public and for adherence to the necessary accreditation requirements. Credentialing is a crucial form of oversight and hence it calls for active involvement of the health care facility’s leaders with strong commitment to quality improvement.
From the given case study, one of the credentialing issues is that the hospital had not established training requirements or standards for judging the physician’s qualification and competence to conduct the procedure. According to Rauch (2012), every hospital is required to review and verify the physicians’ credentials and grant clinical privileges accordingly in order to ensure that the medical staff is qualified and competent to provide certain levels of patient care. The criteria for determining the privileges granted to an individual practitioner should consider individual judgement, individual experience, individual competence, and individual charac...