Information required under §§ 60.7, 60.8, and 60.12 must be submitted to the NPDB within 30 days following the action to be reported, beginning with actions occurring on or after September 1, 1990; information required under § 60.11 must be submitted to the NPDB within 30 days following the action to be reported, beginning with actions occurring on or after January 1, 1992; and information required under §§ 60.9, 60.10, 60.13, 60.14, 60.15, and 60.16 must be submitted to the NPDB within 30 days following the action to be reported, beginning with actions occurring on or after August 21, 1996. Persons or entities responsible for submitting reports of malpractice payments (§ 60.7), negative actions or findings (§ 60.11), or adverse actions (§ 60.12) must additionally provide to their respective state authorities a copy of the report they submit to the NPDB. Following is the list of reportable actions:
(a) Malpractice payments (§ 60.7);
(b) Licensure and certification actions (§§ 60.8, 60.9, and 60.10);
(c) Negative actions or findings (§ 60.11);
(d) Adverse actions (§ 60.12);
(e) Health Care-related Criminal Convictions (§ 60.13);
(f) Health Care-related Civil Judgments (§ 60.14);
(g) Exclusions from Federal or state health care programs (§ 60.15); and
(h) Other adjudicated actions of decisions (§ 60.16).
[78 FR 20484, Apr. 5, 2013, 78 FR 25860, May 6, 2013]
Notes of Decisions
Chudacoff v. Univ. Med. Ctr. of S. Nevada, 649 F.3d 1143 (9th Cir. 2011).
“§ 11133 (a)(1)(A); 45 C.F.R. §§ 60.5 (c), 60.10. . The district court apparently found these rulings to be consistent with its conclusion in its first summary judgment order that Chudacoffs due process rights were violated by the defendants.”
Doe v. Rodgers, M.H.A., 139 F. Supp. 3d 120 (D.D.C. 2015).
“Doe’s resignation was obtained by fraud and therefore not “voluntary,” (3) NPDB Guidebook Rule F-8 is overly broad, overly inclusive, and contrary to the purposes of the Health Care Quality Improvement Act, (4) the Adverse Action Report was untimely because it was not filed…”
Adventist Healthcare v. Behram, 322 A.3d 1 (Md. 2024).
“12 (a)(1)(i), the Hospital failed to do so, see 45 C.F.R. § 60.5 (requiring reporting “within 30 days following the action to be reported”).”
Joel v. Valley Surgical Ctr., 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8924 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 2× “§ 11133 ; 45 C.F.R. § 60.5 (c) (1997).) On February 2, 1996, ValleyCare sent Dr.”
Shean Satgunam v. Michigan State Univ., 556 F. App'x 456 (6th Cir. 2014).
“See 45 C.F.R. § 60.5 (d) (30-day reporting requirement for adverse actions taken by health-care entities); see also 42 U.”
Williams v. Univ. Med. Ctr., 688 F. Supp. 2d 1134 (D. Nev. 2010).
“§ 11133 ; 45 C.F.R. § 60.5 (c), § 60.9. Health care entities include hospitals and professional societies or committees thereof that engage in professional review activity through a formal peer review process for the purpose of furthering quality health care.”
Doe v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 871 F. Supp. 808 (E.D. Pa. 1994).
“45 C.F.R. § 60.5 (b). The HCQI Act also obligates state boards to insure the accuracy of the reports they make to the Data Bank, and provides that anyone who is the subject of such a report can challenge its accuracy.”
Chudacoff v. Univ. Med. Ctr. of S. Nevada, 649 F.3d 1143 (9th Cir. 2011).
“§ 11133 (a)(1)(A); 45 C.F.R. §§ 60.5 (c), 60.10. [3] The district court apparently found these rulings to be consistent with its conclusion in its first summary judgment order that Chudacoff's due process rights were violated by the defendants.”
Taylor v. Portland Adventist Med. Ctr., 255 P.3d 526 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“See 45 CFR §§ 60.5 (a), 60.7. Such a report, in turn, would require a report to the physicians’ state medical hoard.”
— 45 C.F.R. § 60.5(d) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.