Skip to main content

Home/ healthcare regulation and scandals/ Group items matching "orders" in title, tags, annotations or url

Group items matching
in title, tags, annotations or url

Sort By: Relevance | Date Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
anonymous

Dr Social - Should i be concerned??? - 0 views

drsocial.org/...3678

Doctor information ask a family doctor ask a doctor online social telehealth ask a family doctor free chat with a doctor live physician Healthgrades

shared by anonymous on 08 Apr 15 - No Cached
  • anonymous on 08 Apr 15
     
    Healthcare scandals along with the related relevant medical and scientific literature highlighting why the actions are considered a scandal. Regulatory medicine, healthcare, health policy, and patient safety. Doctor Brett Snodgrass, MD has a particular interest in transparency in healthcare and policy suggestions that regulators can consider in order to prevent things such as the VA Scandal, the UMKC Pathology Breast Cancer Scandal of 2011, and many others including the Stem Cell Scandal of South Korea in 2006.
anonymous

Mishler v. State Bd. of Med. Examiners, 849 P. 2d 291 - Nev: Supreme Court 1993 - Google Scholar - 0 views

scholar.google.com/scholar_case

healthcare regulation Nevada medical license phyisician medical regulation state board medical examiners professional regulation Board of Examiners in Medicine Antitrust Board of Medical Examiners patient safety Board of Registration for the Healing Arts

shared by anonymous on 28 Oct 15 - Cached
  • While the Board withheld documents from Dr. Mishler on the expressed basis of its policy of confidentiality, it violated that policy when it forwarded confidential material, including the transcripts of Dr. Mishler's conversations with an investigator, to Dr. Mishler's neurosurgical colleagues.
  • Finally, even though the Board had the right to obtain the records and Dr. Mishler did not, the Board attempted to shift the burden for the preservation of evidence to Dr. Mishler.
  • In short, we conclude that the Board's actions and the proceedings against Dr. Mishler constituted a disturbing abuse of its power.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • Therefore, we reverse the disciplinary order of the Board in its entirety and dismiss all proceedings against Dr. Mishler with prejudice.
  • The Board's power was not exercised for the proper and commendable purpose of protecting 297*297 the public from incompetent and negligent physicians. Instead, the Board wielded its power to ruin the career of an outspoken physician while simultaneously protecting a possibly negligent or incompetent practitioner who had questionable billing procedures.
  • Also, while the Board used its own rules of confidentiality as an excuse to obstruct Dr. Mishler's access to evidence, it violated the same policy with respect to Dr. Mishler's confidential reports.
  • Despite the absence of this evidence—office records, X-rays, and diagnostic films— at the hearing,
  • the Board disciplined Dr. Mishler.
  • anonymous on 28 Oct 15
     
    The Nevada state medical board demonstrated egregious abuse of its power and placed patient safety at risk in doing so.
anonymous

Mishler v. State Bd. of Med. Examiners, 849 P. 2d 291 - Nev: Supreme Court 1993 - 0 views

scholar.google.com/scholar_case

healthcare regulation professional regulation Board of Registration for the Healing Arts medical license Board of Medical Examiners Board of Examiners in Medicine patient safety Arizona medical board AZ healthcare quality improvement act HCQIA Court of Ap

shared by anonymous on 21 Oct 15 - Cached
  • When we look beyond the label of the discipline given to Dr. Mishler to the true nature of the facts, we conclude that the discipline was unwarranted. The Board's power was not exercised for the proper and commendable purpose of protecting 297*297 the public from incompetent and negligent physicians. Instead, the Board wielded its power to ruin the career of an outspoken physician while simultaneously protecting a possibly negligent or incompetent practitioner who had questionable billing procedures.
  • In short, we conclude that the Board's actions and the proceedings against Dr. Mishler constituted a disturbing abuse of its power.
  • Therefore, we reverse the disciplinary order of the Board in its entirety and dismiss all proceedings against Dr. Mishler with prejudice.
  • anonymous on 21 Oct 15
     
    In 1993, the Arizona Supreme Court overturned all the of the AZ Medical Board's claims v. Dr. Mishler with prejudice. The Board's actions against Dr. Mishler constituted a disturbing abuse of its power.
‹ Previous 21 - 23 of 23
Showing 20▼ items per page