Duty of Members to Cooperate
Sub-section 64(3) of the Medical Act states that “every member selected to participate in a practice assessment program has a duty to fully comply with all requirements of the program”. It leaves the details surrounding this compliance requirement to policy.
The CMA Code of Ethics – Section 49 (endorsed by the CPSNS) states that physicians “Be willing to participate in peer review of other physicians and to undergo review by your peers.” In Section 46, it states that physicians should “Recognize that the self-regulation of the profession is a privilege and that each physician has a continuing responsibility to merit this privilege and to support its institutions.”
Without limiting the generality of the co-operation required by sub-section 64 (3), a member is expected to fully comply with, but not limited to, the following:
- Permitting assessors (peer reviewers) to enter and inspect the premises where the member engages in the practice of medicine;
- Permitting assessors (peer reviewers) access to the member’s records of patient care and to review and inspect these records;
- Providing, in the form required, information requested by the peer review program about the clinical care the member has administered to patients or about the member’s records of care or methods of practice;
- Allowing direct observation of patient care;
- When available, permitting assessors (peer reviewers) access to practice metrics such as prescription monitoring profiles, test utilization and patient outcomes;
- Providing assessors (peer reviewers) access to information related to continuing professional development plans and activities;
- Conferring with assessors or the Peer Review Committee when required to do so;
- Permitting and fully participating in any and all re-assessments the Peer Review Committee or assessors (peer reviewers) deem necessary for the proper administration and completion of the peer review process; and
- Any practice improvement plan formulated by the Peer Review Committee.
Approved by: Peer Review Committee; Assessment Committee; Council
Approval Dates: June 19, 2020; September 11, 2020; October 9, 2020
Review Date: June 2022