Texas House Bill HB287

Texas 2013 - 83rd Regular

• Filed: 12/14/12

Caption

Relating to the confidentiality of certain information following the completion of a review conducted by an independent review organization.

Impact

The passage of HB 287 is expected to have significant implications for the healthcare system in Texas. By allowing parties involved in a medical dispute to request the identities and qualifications of physicians who determined the review outcome, the bill aims to foster accountability among healthcare providers. This could potentially empower patients and other stakeholders by providing them with more information regarding the reviewers' credentials and expertise.

Summary

House Bill 287 pertains to the confidentiality of certain information following the completion of a medical review conducted by an independent review organization. The bill amends the Insurance Code to clarify the conditions under which the names and professional qualifications of healthcare practitioners involved in these reviews may be disclosed. Specifically, it establishes that upon written request, parties involved in a medical dispute that has been independently reviewed can obtain this information, thereby enhancing transparency in the review process.

Conclusion

Ultimately, HB 287 represents a legislative effort to strike a balance between protecting sensitive information and promoting transparency in medical review processes. If enacted, it will revise existing laws to open avenues for information sharing in situations where independent medical reviews lead to disagreements about care decisions.

Contention

Notably, the bill addresses the tension between transparency and confidentiality in the context of medical reviews. Proponents of the bill argue that increased access to information about the medical reviewers will lead to greater trust in the review process and ensure that determinations are made by qualified professionals. Critics, however, might raise concerns regarding the potential for these disclosures to affect the impartiality of medical reviewers and create unease among healthcare professionals about potential repercussions from disputes.