Core Privileging and Credentialing: Hospitals' Approach to Gynecologic Surgery

Information and Guidance on the Adoption of Surgical Innovation and Technology in Urogynecology

“…The challenge for professional societies is to generate these recommendations in a timely fashion, which may not be feasible with the rapid introduction of NTT in health care. When not available, credentialing standards can be accomplished with surrogates for competency, including completion of training programs, board certification, volume requirements, and even national and international recognition in close collaboration with all stakeholders (eg, surgeon adopters, industry, and patients) 41–43 …”

“…When not available, credentialing standards can be accomplished with surrogates for competency, including completion of training programs, board certification, volume requirements, and even national and international recognition in close collaboration with all stakeholders (eg, surgeon adopters, industry, and patients). [41][42][43] The American Urogynecologic Society recommends a balance between introducing NTT that may improve patient outcomes and mitigating the increase in perioperative morbidity, especially during a surgeon's initial learning phase. Assessment of surgeon competency can be longitudinal and should liberally incorporate precepting and/or proctoring along with focused professional practice evaluation to minimize risks to patients.…”

Evidence Review for the American College of Surgeons Quality Verification Part II: Processes for Reliable Quality Improvement

“…After title, abstract, and reference review, we included 2 SRs and 4 additional studies not already included in the SRs discussing credentialing and privileging processes for surgical procedures, including a collective 70 unique studies (Table 4). [29][30][31][32][33][34] The additional studies included 2 multiinstitutional surveys, 1 single-institution retrospective review, and 1 multi-institutional retrospective review.…”

“…32 Despite common themes, existing credentialing and privileging processes have significant variability, with reports of up to 76.9% of some procedures without clear privileging criteria, and 69% of physicians believing that processes were too relaxed at their institution. 33,34 Summary There is evidence that standardized credentialing and privileging has potential to improve patient outcomes, although current processes have considerable variation and opportunities for improvement.…”