Collaborative Physician Agreement

Posted on


Under the new rules, how will you deal with the prescription and dispensing of drugs and products that are not included in the Common Practice Agreement under Rule 21 NVC36.0809(b)(3)(A)(B) and 21 NVC32M.0109(b)(3)(A)(B)? Similarly, if an independent physician has contractually agreed to be an employee of a NP and the physician performs the necessary tasks and cooperates upon request, then the physician should not be held liable for the errors of a NP. However, a sued physician must defend himself and it is likely that the costs are linked, even if the doctor is ultimately not held liable. Therefore, a cooperating physician must be sure that he or she has professional liability insurance covering the costs of the defense when the physician is sued for the acts or omissions of a NP. PNs, physicians, and employers often ask how many, if any, physicians would need to be compensated for being an employee of a PR. The time required for the doctor depends on the novelty or experience of the NP and the specific provisions of state law. Whether and to what extent a physician should be compensated also depends on whether the physician and NP are employees of a hospital or other organization, compared to a situation in which the physician and NP have their own private practices. For the employed physician, collaborative responsibilities can be part of the set of tasks performed by the physician for the organization of the salary he or she receives. If the organization does not pay a guaranteed salary to the physician, but compensates him exclusively on the bills attributable to the physician, it would be wise to compensate a cooperating physician for the time necessary to supervise a NP. Whether a cooperating physician should be compensated for increased exposure to complaints depends on the situation.

An employed physician who works in the course of his or her work within the organization is exposed to a risk similar to that of a supervisor or medical officer in an organization, since anyone who directs or supervises another person is exposed to a definite risk of being prosecuted if the person under surveillance makes a mistake. If the supervisor or staff is available, if the employee needs help and if he or she ensures that the employee is competent and properly trained, the supervisor or staff should not be held responsible for the error of a staff member. . . .

Comments are closed.