Mass. guidelines clarify law on hospital mergers.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
SEARCH · Search PubMed
Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
While home care agency staff are overseeing the care of their clients, agency administrators must be conscious of the wellbeing of the agency itself. Many of the legal issues concerning any business venture apply equally to home care. At the same time, there are many legal concerns unique to health and home health care. To survive and flourish in the 1990s, administrators must be cognizant of both business and health law requirements.
In Summit Health Ltd. v. Pinhas, the United States Supreme Court by a narrow majority found that the exclusion of an ophthalmologist from a hospital in Los Angeles had a sufficient effect on interstate commerce to establish federal jurisdiction under the Sherman Act. In resolving a split among the federal circuit courts of appeal, the Court applied the broad jurisdictional test from McLain v. Real Estate Board of New Orleans, Inc. to peer review proceedings. Despite many ambiguities in the majority opinion by Justice Stevens and a scathing dissent by Justice Scalia, the effect of Pinhas will be to increase the suits in federal court on antitrust grounds brought by aggrieved medical staff members and applicants denied appointments or privileges, and to decrease, if not eliminate, the likelihood of preliminary dismissal on jurisdictional grounds. This, in turn, should serve to emphasize the importance of complying with the Health Care Quality Improvement Act in order to obtain immunity from damages under federal antitrust and state laws.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The year preceding June 30, 2004, was one of the most active periods in the development of health policy and health law in a generation. Against the odds, President Bush delivered on his promise of a prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries. As with all momentous legislation, the prescription drug benefit was accompanied by legislative changes both large and small, affecting virtually every sector of the healthcare community. In addition to new legislation, the Bush administration continued to release regulations deemed vitally important by those regulated. The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations pursued new standards and processes to improve patient safety, and the courts dealt with a myriad of health law issues.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.