Back to News

Court: Peer Review by Any Other Name Still Peer Review

Published on

August 19, 2021

Pennsylvania hospitals have some new guidance on what constitutes a protected “peer review” document after a recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling.

The case, Leadbitter v. Keystone Anesthesia Consultants, involved a question of whether a hospital was required to produce an unredacted credentialing file for an orthopedic surgeon who was accused of medical malpractice. The hospital sought to withhold certain review documents that were created by its credentialing committee in considering whether to award the surgeon privileges. According to the decision, all documents that are a result of peer review activity by a hospital committee, whether it is performed by an officially deemed “peer review committee” or not, are protected and do not need to be turned over in subsequent litigation, including in medical malpractice cases.

Before the decision, only the documents of a specified “peer review committee” were protected and shielded from discovery under the Pennsylvania Peer Review Protection Act. The new decision distances itself from the high court’s formalistic analysis in the much-discussed Reginelli v. Boggs case, which held that peer review protection only applied to documents of a “review committee” but not those of a “review organization.”

The new guidance provides a pragmatic approach that focuses on whether a hospital committee is engaged in a peer review function rather than whether the hospital committee meets the formal requirements of being a “peer review committee.” Consistent with the goals of increasing the quality of health care in Pennsylvania, the approach in Leadbitter supports greater flexibility in performing peer review activities while maintaining the confidentially needed to encourage a candid discussion. 

Additionally, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court provided much needed reassurance that information provided by the National Practitioner Data Bank is protected under the federal Health Care Quality Improvement Act. The ruling aligns the federal and state obligations to maintain the confidentially of Data Bank reports.

If you have any questions about this decision or how it could affect your health care organization, please contact me or any member of the Barley Snyder Health Care Industry Group.


Related News

View More News
Press Release
August 25, 2025

Barley Snyder Partner Lauralee Baker Named “Lawyer of the Year” in Medical Malpractice – Defendants by Best Lawyers

For Immediate Release Lancaster, Pa. – Barley Snyder partner Lauralee B. Baker has been named a “Lawyer of the Year...

Learn More
Press Release
August 21, 2025

Barley Snyder Attorneys Recognized by Best Lawyers in America

For Immediate Release Lancaster, Pa. – Barley Snyder is proud to announce that 51 of its attorneys have been recognized by...

Learn More
News Alert
August 7, 2025

Pennsylvania Appellate Court Upholds Venue-Selection Clause in Contracts

The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently issued a significant decision reaffirming the principle that parties may, in advance...

Learn More

Other Upcoming Events

View All Upcoming Events
Oct
07
2:30 pm
-
6:00 pm
event
Location

2025 York Business Seminar

Learn More
Oct
14
2:30 pm
-
6:00 pm
event
Location

2025 Harrisburg Business Seminar

Learn More
Oct
30
2:30 pm
-
6:00 pm
event
Location

2025 Lancaster Business Seminar

Learn More

Get in Touch

Our attorneys, paralegals and staff look forward to hearing from you. Please reach out to let us know how we can help.

Get In Touch
RECOGNIZED IN
Super Lawyers
Best Law Firms US News
Best Lawyers