Colorado § 12-30-203 - Use of professional review committees.

§ 12-30-203. Use of professional review committees.

(1) (a) The general assembly recognizes that:

(I) The medical board and the nursing board, while assuming and retaining ultimate authority for licensure and discipline in accordance with article 240 of this title 12 and part 1 of article 255 of this title 12, respectively, and in accordance with this part 2, cannot practically and economically assume responsibility over every single allegation or instance of purported deviation from the standards of quality for the practice of medicine, the practice of nursing, or the practice as a certified midwife; from the standards of professional conduct; or from the standards of appropriate care; and

(II) An attempt to exercise this oversight would result in extraordinary delays in the determination of the legitimacy of the allegations and would result in the inappropriate and unequal exercise of their authority to license and discipline persons licensed under article 240 of this title 12, advanced practice registered nurses, or certified midwives.

(b) It is therefore the intent of the general assembly that the medical board and the nursing board utilize and allow professional review committees and governing boards to assist them in meeting their responsibilities under article 240 of this title 12 and part 1 of article 255 of this title 12, respectively, and under this part 2.

(2) Persons licensed under article 240 of this title 12, advanced practice registered nurses, and certified midwives are encouraged to serve upon professional review committees when called to do so and to study and review in an objectively reasonable manner the professional conduct of persons licensed under article 240 of this title 12, advanced practice registered nurses, or certified midwives, including the competence of, professional conduct of, or the quality and appropriateness of patient care provided by those persons.

(3) (a) The use of professional review committees is an extension of the authority of the medical board and nursing board. However, except as otherwise provided in this part 2, nothing in this part 2 limits the authority of professional review committees properly constituted under this part 2.

(b) Professional review committees, the members who constitute the committees, governing boards, authorized entities, and persons who participate directly or indirectly in professional review activities are granted certain immunities from liability arising from actions that are within the scope of their activities as provided in section 12-30-207. These grants of immunity from liability are necessary to ensure that professional review committees and governing boards can exercise their professional knowledge and judgment.

Source: L. 2019: Entire title R&RE with relocations, (HB 19-1172), ch. 136, p. 779, § 1, effective October 1. L. 2020: (1)(a)(I) and (1)(b) amended, (HB 20-1183), ch. 157, p. 698, § 43, effective July 1. L. 2023: (1)(a) and (2) amended, (SB 23-167), ch. 261, p. 1535, § 34, effective May 25.

Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 12-36.5-103 as it existed prior to 2019.

ANNOTATION

Annotator's note. The following annotations include cases decided under a former provision similar to this section.

While this section clearly expresses the need for peer review and its importance to the regulation of the practice of medicine, it is insufficient to provide absolute immunity in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Moore v. Gunnison Valley Hosp., 310 F.3d 1315 (10th Cir. 2002).

A mere statement by the Colorado legislature that peer-review committees are extensions of the state medical board's authority is insufficient to clothe those committees in the same immunity as the board itself. In order for these committees to be viewed as extensions of the medical board and worthy of similar immunity, the state board must exercise adequate oversight and authority over the peer-review committees. Moore v. Gunnison Valley Hosp., 310 F.3d 1315 (10th Cir. 2002).

Professional peer review conduct in a private medical facility does not constitute state action for the purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. A private entity's conduct is fairly attributable to the state only if it meets two criteria: The deprivation is caused by the exercise of some right or privilege created by the state and the entity charged with the deprivation is fairly said to be a state actor. N. Colo. Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Nicholas, 27 P.3d 828 (Colo. 2001).