Communication between the medical staff and leadership is important, the AHA says, but "We believe that CMS's substitution of its own judgment about how to accomplish this goal without thorough and considered public comment has resulted in a significantly ill-informed policy with which many hospitals will be unable to comply."
Madera, on the other hand, says the AMA strongly supports having a member of the medical staff on a hospital's governing body.
"While the corporate executives, attorney, civic leaders, and other non-clinician who sit on the governing body often bring relevant expertise to the overall management of the hospital, as non-clinicians, they are not equipped to evaluate and guide patient care at the facility."
Wilson, of the AMA, says it's important that physicians who take care of patients at the hospital have input on such decisions as "how you monitor patients or how you move patients from different places within a hospital, or how you care for patients who are very ill or have infectious diseases.
"One would assume that (the hospitals) are trying to look for efficiency and economy, and they believe that if they have one big system, one central group can serve all those functions. We disagree, and we think it's counterintuitive to suggest that for any one hospital you wouldn't have a medical staff making recommendations about patient care and safety."
Prompted by concerns voiced by AHA and other stakeholders, CMS said Friday it will hold off implementing a new requirement that hospital governing boards include a medical staff member and will reconsider the requirement in future rulemaking.