How should medical staff credentialing address non-physician practitioners (NPs, PAs, CRNAs, etc.)?

• A. Establish specific privileges aligned to their scope of practice, verify education and certification, and ensure appropriate supervision as required
• B. Treat them identical to physicians
• C. Exclude them from credentialing
• D. Award unrestricted privileges without verification

Answer: (A)

Establish specific privileges aligned to each non-physician practitioner’s scope of practice, verify education and certification, and ensure appropriate supervision as required. This approach grounds credentialing in actual competencies and regulatory expectations, so practitioners are authorized only for the procedures and patient-care activities they’re trained and credentialed to perform. Verifying education and certification confirms credentials are legitimate and current, which supports patient safety and accreditation standards. Requiring supervision as mandated by law, contract, or bylaws ensures appropriate oversight and accountability, reflecting the collaborative, non-physician–physician dynamic in healthcare. Other approaches fall short: treating non-physician practitioners exactly like physicians ignores differences in training and supervision; excluding them from credentialing deprives patients of appropriate care and undermines governance; granting unrestricted privileges without verification ignores essential checks that protect patients and facilities.