NC Gen Stat § 58-50-87 (2021)
2021 North Carolina General Statutes|Chapter 58 - Insurance|Article 50 - General Accident and Health Insurance Regulations.|§ 58-50-87 - Minimum qualifications for independent review organizations.

 58-50-87. Minimum qualifications for independent review organizations.(a) As a condition of approval under G.S. 58-50-85 to conduct external reviews, an independent review organization shall have and maintain written policies and procedures that govern all aspects of both the standard external review process and the expedited external review process set forth in G.S. 58-50-80 and G.S. 58-50-82 that include, at a minimum:(1) A quality assurance mechanism in place that ensures:a. That external reviews are conducted within the specified time frames and required notices are provided in a timely manner.b. The selection of qualified and impartial clinical peer reviewers to conduct external reviews on behalf of the independent review organization and suitable matching of reviewers to specific cases.c. The confidentiality of medical and treatment records and clinical review criteria.d. That any person employed by or under contract with the independent review organization adheres to the requirements of this Part.e. The independence and impartiality of the independent review organization and the external review process and limits the ability of any person to improperly influence the external review decision.(2) A toll-free telephone service to receive information on a 24-hour-day, seven-day-a-week basis related to external reviews that is capable of accepting or recording inquiries or providing appropriate instruction to incoming telephone callers during other than normal business hours.(3) An agreement to maintain and provide to the Commissioner the information set out in G.S. 58-50-90.(4) A program for credentialing clinical peer reviewers.(5) An agreement to contractual terms or written requirements established by the Commissioner regarding the procedures for handling a review.(6) That the independent review organization consult with a medical doctor licensed to practice in North Carolina to advise the independent review organization on issues related to the standard of practice, technology, and training of North Carolina physicians with respect to the organization's North Carolina business.(b) All clinical peer reviewers assigned by an independent review organization to conduct external reviews shall be medical doctors or other appropriate health care providers who meet the following minimum qualifications:(1) Be an expert in the treatment of the covered person's injury, illness, or medical condition that is the subject of the external review.(2) Be knowledgeable about the recommended health care service or treatment through recent or current actual clinical experience treating patients with the same or similar injury, illness, or medical condition of the covered person.(3) If the covered person's treating provider is a medical doctor, hold a nonrestricted license and, if a specialist medical doctor, a current certification by a recognized American medical specialty board in the area or areas appropriate to the subject of the external review.(4) If the covered person's treating provider is not a medical doctor, hold a nonrestricted license, registration, or certification in the same allied health occupation as the covered person's treating provider.(5) Have no history of disciplinary actions or sanctions, including loss of staff privileges or participation restrictions, that have been taken or are pending by any hospital, governmental agency or unit, or regulatory body that raise a substantial question as to the clinical peer reviewer's physical, mental, or professional competence or moral character.(c) In addition to the requirements set forth in subsection (a) of this section, an independent review organization may not own or control, be a subsidiary of, or in any way be owned or controlled by, or exercise control with a health benefit plan, a national, State, or local trade association of health benefit plans, or a national, State, or local trade association of health care providers.(d) In addition to the requirements set forth in subsections (a), (b), and (c) of this section, to be approved under G.S. 58-50-85 to conduct an external review of a specified case, neither the independent review organization selected to conduct the external review nor any clinical peer reviewer assigned by the independent organization to conduct the external review may have a material professional, familial, or financial conflict of interest with any of the following:(1) The insurer that is the subject of the external review.(2) The covered person whose treatment is the subject of the external review or the covered person's authorized representative.(3) Any officer, director, or management employee of the insurer that is the subject of the external review.(4) The health care provider, the health care provider's medical group, or independent practice association recommending the health care service or treatment that is the subject of the external review.(5) The facility at which the recommended health care service or treatment would be provided.(6) The developer or manufacturer of the principal drug, device, procedure, or other therapy being recommended for the covered person whose treatment is the subject of the external review.(e) In determining whether an independent review organization or a clinical peer reviewer of the independent review organization has a material professional, familial, or financial conflict of interest for purposes of subsection (d) of this section, the Commissioner shall take into consideration situations where the independent review organization to be assigned to conduct an external review of a specified case or a clinical peer reviewer to be assigned by the independent review organization to conduct an external review of a specified case may have an apparent professional, familial, or financial relationship or connection with a person described in subsection (d) of this section, but that the characteristics of that relationship or connection are such that they are not a material professional, familial, or financial conflict of interest that results in the disapproval of the independent review organization or the clinical peer reviewer from conducting the external review. (2001-446, s. 4.5.)