A recent article in the American Medical News discussed how doctors felt about these devices. Their opinions shed light on the benefits and drawbacks for patients.
Positives of electronic health records
Documentation: First, doctors noted that the EHRs allow them to thoroughly document exams, including providing a complete record of those exams. Thorough documentation means better medical care and, hopefully, fewer medical errors.
Easier to retrieve data: EHRs also make it simpler for physicians to access information. Gone are the days of long paper trails and the inaccuracies that arise from them. Instead, a doctor can use a simple query to find information. According to one doctor, this is "huge ... from a patient safety standpoint." Doctors can now see what other providers have done for a patient and act quickly on that knowledge.
]]> Negatives of electronic health recordsData can be difficult to find: While it is possible to query information using EHRs, it may also be more difficult for doctors to find one piece of information than with paper charts. This is because today's doctors have been trained to use the paper charts and know what pages contain what information. With the vast amount of information provided on an EHR, it may take longer for doctors to find the exact piece of information they need.
Changes in physician-patient relationship: Many doctors type information into an EHR while speaking with patients, which gives the exam room the feel of an interview instead of a conversation between doctors and patients. This may have a negative impact on doctor-patient communication, which can lead to medical errors.
Whether or not EHRs will reduce medical malpractice has yet to be seen. Relying on computers can be difficult, especially if the computer system malfunctions during a vital time. However, having all of the information on a patient available via the touch of a few keyboard buttons may prevent medical errors such as medication errors, surgical errors and misdiagnosis.
Source: American Medical News, "Doctors' love-hate relationship with EHRs," Pamela Lewis Dolan, May 7, 2012.
]]>The goal is to reduce defensive medicine practices that raise health costs nationwide and provide an alternative means of resolving disputes in some cases. The program has already seen success in cutting costs and providing more reliable compensation for injuries caused by medical malpractice. Federal grants will expand the program to hospitals across the country.
]]> The program requires hospitals to quickly disclose unforeseen accidents and negative health outcomes to patients and families, following up with an investigation. If the hospital concludes that it made a mistake, it apologizes and offers compensation to the victim. Patients can look forward to the program's encouragement of openness, honesty and concern for patient rights from hospitals and medical professionals. The program discourages cover ups, finger-pointing, and efforts to avoid responsibility after mistakes are made.In some cases, the program could give patients quicker resolution of disputes. It could also encourage doctors to provide better care and listen more closely to patients.
The program may not be a solution for everyone, and not all victims may feel their concerns - or injuries - are adequately addressed. While the initiative may be a step in the right direction, doctors should always be honest and accountable. The program does not guarantee openness or fair compensation to victims of medical mistakes. Residents of Michigan who experience medical mistakes firsthand or in their families may want to consider consulting with an attorney about their rights.
Further, if a hospital offers a financial resolution, the patient may be required to waive the right to any future compensation. An experienced advocate can help patients determine if an offer fairly compensates them for their injuries, if bringing in a mediator is appropriate, or if legal representation is advisable before accepting an offer.
Source: Claims Journal, "Massachusetts Docs Eye New Approach to Malpractice Claims," Bob Salsberg, Apr. 23, 2012.
]]>That is why a study in the Annals of Emergency Medicine recommends that emergency rooms hire professional translators. According to the study, serious emergency room errors were two times more likely when interpreters were not present or the interpreters were family members or other amateurs.
]]> How big is the problem? Nearly 25 million residents in the U.S. are not very proficient in English. And since somewhere between 18 percent and a quarter of individuals visit the emergency room each year, millions of people who do not speak English fluently come to the ER.According to the study and other similar studies, having a professional translator available can reduce costs by preventing unnecessary tests. It would also undoubtedly improve patient safety and reduce the potential for medical malpractice. Furthermore, this was the first study to show the large difference between amateur interpreters and trained interpreters. The study found that trained interpreters made potentially risky errors 12 percent of the time, while untrained interpreters made risky errors 22 percent of the time. In healthcare, that is a significant difference.
We have well-trained interpreters in the courtroom - interpreters capable of understanding difficult legal concepts. Why should healthcare be any different, especially when lives are at stake? Hospitals need interpreters capable of understanding medical jargon and who are trained to ask the right questions. Without them, hospitals are opening their doors to potential medical malpractice claims caused by communication errors.
Source: Msnbc.com, "Interpreters in ER may limit medical errors: study," Reuters, Apr. 17, 2012
]]>More patients are going to doctor's offices armed with information regarding specific symptoms. This information may be right or wrong, but at the very least, it can spark a quality conversation between the doctor and patient.
Discussing particular symptoms, life style and other issues with a doctor can help a patient and doctor start down the path to making informed decisions about the right course of treatment. However, a new study recently discovered that doctors may not reciprocate with patients in the exchange of information. And this can lead to medical malpractice.
]]> Some speculate that fear of medical malpractice claims may in part be to blame for the results of a new survey that shows many doctors are not upfront with their patients. The study, published in Health Affairs, asked 2,000 doctors about the degree of disclosure they exercise with their patients. According to the survey, 34 percent of doctors do not feel it is important to disclose serious medical errors to their patients, while 20 percent said that they did not disclose a medical error to their patients last year. Over 50 percent of doctors responded that they may give patients a better prognosis than test results predict.This lack of disclosure can leave patients at a disadvantage and can affect their overall health. It can even lead to serious errors. Doctors are people too; they are not infallible and can and do make mistakes. Yet, when medical errors cause serious injury, doctors should be held accountable through medical malpractice lawsuits.
Source: ABC News, "Your Doctor May Be Keeping Secrets," Prevention, Apr. 8, 2012.
]]>Medical malpractice lawsuits are one of the most important ways to hold negligent medical professionals accountable for what they do. Yet, a lawsuit alone will not necessarily stop someone else from committing the same error. Instead, we must also advocate for patient safety in Michigan and across the country.
]]> The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is one federal organization that is working to promote patient safety and prevent one of the most common forms of medical malpractice: medication errors. It has recently partnered with the Institutes for Safe Medication Practices in an effort to teach health care professionals how to more safely prescribe and administer medications, as well as help consumers use medications safely.According to the FDA, it has received more than 95,000 medication error reports in the last ten years. However, the number of actual medication errors is probably much higher than that, since many more go unreported.
Medication errors are caused by a variety of issues, including:
The FDA also plays a significant role in reviewing drug names, labels, packaging and other issues involving drug manufacturing and packaging. It reviews approximately 1,400 medication errors a month and determines what caused those errors to provide guidance to the medication industry.
Source: U.S. Food and Drug Administration, "FDA 101: Medication Errors."
]]>The brachial plexus is the network of nerves between the neck and the arm. If damaged, function of the arm can be impaired.
Injury to the brachial plexus often occurs when a baby's neck is pushed to the side during prolonged or difficult delivery. Sometimes, medical professionals may need to deliver the infant quickly, using force that stretches the infant's neck and causes injury.
Most infants (90-95 percent) fully recover from their injuries. Those that do not may have scar tissue from the injury, a rupture to the nerve or an avulsion, which occurs when the nerve is separated from the spinal cord.
]]> Erb's palsy is the most common form of brachial plexus injury. It involves injuries to the upper nerves and can cause impairment in the shoulder. An infant with Erb's palsy may still be able to move his or her fingers. If an infant suffers damage to both lower and upper nerves, he or she suffers from a "global brachial plexus injury."When is a brachial plexus birth injury medical malpractice?
Brachial plexus injuries are often the result of difficult labor, not medical malpractice; however, you may have a medical malpractice claim if the doctors did not take action to ameliorate the situation or if the doctor's negligence caused the injury.
Usually, medical professionals identify brachial plexus injuries immediately and are able to prevent future harm to the infant. A plaintiff may be able to show that medical malpractice occurred if:
If you believe your infant's brachial plexus injury was the result of medical malpractice, take the time to speak with an experienced medical malpractice lawyer about your options for recovery.
]]>Originally, the IPAB bill was separate from the medical malpractice caps, but House Republicans combined the bills last week. While the IPAB repeal bill (which would repeal a 15-member board that analyzes the cost of Medicare) had support from both Republicans and Democrats, the medical malpractice caps did not. Only five Democrats voted in support of the full bill.
]]> Furthermore, the White House has threatened to veto the bill, claiming that the IPAB has not had a chance to work and that "the administration opposes placing artificial caps on malpractice awards, which will prevent patients and other claimants who have been wrongfully harmed from receiving just compensation."Non-economic damage caps
If the bill succeeds, there would be a $250,000 cap on non-economic damages for medical malpractice lawsuits. The cap would potentially include compensation for punitive damages and the pain and suffering caused by medical malpractice.
Many states have already enacted their own versions of tort reform. However, the $250,000 cap is more stringent than the med mal caps imposed by some states. For example, in New Jersey, there is a $350,000 cap on punitive damages unless the compensatory damages (such as medical bills) are particularly large. In those cases, the cap is set at five times the compensatory damages.
The American Bar Association strongly opposes medical malpractice caps. Proponents of tort reform believe that limiting non-economic damages in med mal lawsuits will reduce malpractice insurance and fraud. However, there has been little evidence to prove that there is a link between limiting damages and the cost of malpractice insurance.
Medical malpractice lawsuits allow individuals to recover compensation when they are injured by negligent medical professionals. They also hold doctors accountable for their negligence. Perhaps most importantly, though, a med mal lawsuit is one of the only ways to stop doctors from harming others and to ensure that we receive quality care when we entrust our lives to medical professionals.
Source: HealthLeaders Media, "IPAB Repeal Bill, With Medical Rider, Heads to Full House," Margaret D. Tocknell, Mar. 21, 2012.
]]>"This isn't science fiction. Millions of medical devices, including artificial hips, contact lens solution, heart stents, and pacemakers, are being recalled - 700 different products a year," Guest wrote. And many of these devices, he pointed out, were never properly tested.
That is because the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act allows a faster process for some low- and moderate-risk devices. Known as Pre-market Notification, or 510(k) approval, this process has led to the approval of a number of high-risk devices that caused death or life-threatening injuries, including synthetic mesh devices (surgical mesh) and Johnson & Johnson's DePuy hip implants.
]]> Consumer Reports is now attempting to change the approval process, which another nonprofit organization, the Institute of Medicine, supports. That organization has called the 510(k) approval process "fatally flawed."The FDA has said it will not scrap the process, but that it could be improved. Unfortunately, the FDA does not have the authority to improve the process. What the FDA can do is change device classifications so that certain devices are not eligible for the process. Today, low- to moderate-risk devices are eligible for the 510(k) process, and it may be possible to reclassify some of those devices.
Lawmakers, on the other hand, can change the process. At least one piece of legislation is currently before the U.S. Congress: the Safety of Untested and New Devices Act of 2012 (SOUND Devices Act). That act would give the FDA more authority to reject certain devices as long as those devices are similar to other, recalled devices.
Those injured by defective medical devices can bring lawsuits against the companies that manufactured the devices. If a physician's actions contributed to the injury, they may also be able to bring a medical malpractice lawsuit.
Source: Reuters, "Consumer Reports taps ire over bad medical devices," Debra Sherman, Mar. 12, 2012.
]]>According to a new research study by the Journal of General Internal Medicine, doctors make this latter mistake frequently - at least for some surgical procedures.
]]> The study looked at one particular procedure: a stent procedure involved in coronary disease. The patients involved in the study were on Medicare. Only 10 percent of the patients who received the stent procedure said they were informed of possible alternatives to the procedure, even though alternatives existed. Furthermore, only 19 percent of the study participants reported that they spoke with their doctors about the "pros and cons" of the procedure.The study also looked at patients who underwent prostate surgery. Sixty-four percent of prostate surgery patients said they discussed surgery alternatives with their doctors and 63 percent discussed the pros and cons of the surgery. While these numbers are much better than those for the stent procedure, they are still not at 100 percent.
Why the discrepancy? According to some medical professionals, it is often necessary to put a stent in during an angiogram, where the blockage is often diagnosed. Yet, why don't doctors discuss the possibility of putting a stent in before the angiogram?
"People should know what their options are . . . the core of a good decision-making process is to know what the options are," said one of the study's authors, Floyd J. Fowler Jr.
Failing to discuss the options available to a patient is unethical, but it does not always amount to medical malpractice. If, however, the communication problems contributed to an injury caused by a medical professional, you may be able to bring a lawsuit for medical malpractice.
Source: The Wall Street Journal Health Blog, "Surgical Patients Not Getting Information on Alternatives," Katherine Hobson, Mar. 2, 2012.
]]>In fact, in order to even bring a Michigan doctor negligence lawsuit, a plaintiff must obtain a medical opinion from an expert in the same medical specialty as the doctor who caused the injury.
What else do you need to show in order to prove that you or a loved one is a victim of medical malpractice?
]]> Breach of the Accepted Standard of CareFirst, you must show that the medical professional or facility made a mistake. Did they fail to follow the medical standard of care? In other words, did the medical professional fail to provide the type of medical care that a professional in his or her professional capacity is expected to provide?
Every medical professional has a duty to meet the accepted standard of care in his or her profession. A medical professional may breach the standard of care through a negligent action (such as giving a patient the wrong medication) or through an omission (such as failing to diagnose cancer).
Causation
Next, you must show that the breach of care caused your injury. Many people believe that simply showing that a doctor acted negligently is enough to prove medical malpractice. Unfortunately, that is not always the case. Instead, you must show that the doctor's negligent actions put you in a worse state than you would have been in had the negligence not occurred.
If, for example, a doctor failed to diagnose untreatable cancer a week before another doctor properly diagnosed the cancer, a court would not hold the first doctor liable for failure to diagnose / medical malpractice since the negligence did not cause injury to the victim. Nothing that the doctor did caused further harm to the victim since the cancer was untreatable. This is a much different scenario than if a doctor failed to diagnose the cancer when it was curable and where the amount of time elapsed meant the difference between life and death.
Because of the unique legal process and medical issues involved in a medical malpractice lawsuit, it is important to turn to an attorney experienced in these cases.
]]>Dr. Julius Cuong Pham, an assistant professor at John Hopkins University School of Medicine, and his associates, produced the study by examining medication errors from 592 U.S. hospitals, which were voluntarily reported from 2000 through 2005.
Dr. Pham believes the nearly 24,000 emergency room medication errors to be particularly concerning given the growing trend in U.S. hospitals of hiring temporary nursing staff to fill both short-term and long-term shifts. Temporary nurses are becoming more prevalent because they are considered a cheaper option than permanent nurses since they do not receive benefits.
]]> The results of the study suggest that lack of familiarity with their surroundings may contribute to the increased rate of medication errors for temporary workers. However, the study's authors are quick to warn that the cause of the increased rate of errors may be more complex than simply the presence of temporary workers. In a statement, Dr. Pham observed, "A place that uses a lot of temporary staff may have more quality of care issues in general. It may not be the temporary staff that causes those errors but a function of the whole system."Patients in Michigan, and throughout the U.S., need to be vigilant when it comes to medical errors. If you have been injured as a result of a medical error contact an experienced medical malpractice attorney in your area to be advised of your rights.
]]>Often times, when a medical error occurs, many doctors restrict their communication with the patient for fear of admitting fault. Consequently, the only way the victim can get answers is to go to court. These instant adversarial positions can make resolution difficult. However, a policy instituted by the University of Michigan (U-M) may have a better way to tackle these situations.
In a report by The New York Times, Richard C. Boothman, chief risk officer for the University of Michigan Health System, stated that by doctors and hospitals refusing to talk, "we have given the patient no alternative but to sue." In response, U-M Health System's new policy is what they call the "humanistic approach."
]]> Basically, the "humanistic approach" involves the U-M conducting a full investigation following a medical mistake. This investigation includes not only the doctors, but the patient and patient's attorney as well. Then, the U-M apologizes if they feel they are in the wrong, and the parties work out reasonable compensation.Results of this new approach have been dramatic for the U-M. Costs per medical mistake case have been cut in half, and the U-M has saved $2 million in the first year alone. Moreover, settlement time has been reduced from 20 to 10 months. It is a win-win situation, the hospital saves money and the patient injured as a result of the medical mistake receives his or her settlement sooner; not to mention the emotional closure for the victim because of an actual apology.
Medical errors occur every day and in every state. These mistakes can have devastating effects on the victim, and can cause lifelong agony or even death. If you or a loved one has been the victim of a medical error, contact an experienced medical malpractice attorney in your area to be advised of your rights and options.
]]>According to research published in the Annals of Surgery, the chance of dying after an emergency surgery was 20 percent higher at a teaching hospital as compared to their non-teaching counterpart.
]]> Twenty-three out of every 1,000 patients died at non-teaching hospitals after emergency surgery, while 28 out of every 1,000 died at teaching hospitals. Authors of the study were unable to provide an exact explanation for the different rates of death between the types of hospitals, but it may be attributed to the severity of illnesses of patients at each hospital.A University of Michigan surgery professor, who was not involved in the study, Dr. Justin Dimick, stated that the results of the study do not reflect the types of patients that are hospitalized at teaching hospitals. He generally feels that teaching hospitals tend to get the more complex cases. For example, a cancer patient at a teaching hospital may have more severe cancer than a cancer patient at a non-teaching hospital; something the study did not take into account.
Regardless of the actual reasons behind the increased risk of death at teaching hospitals, patients need to protect themselves from potential injury. Medical errors occur every day that may severely injure, or possibly kill, patients. If you have been injured due to mistakes that occurred during a hospital stay, contact an experienced attorney in your area today to be advised of your rights.
Source: Reuters, "Which hospitals have more problems after surgery?" Kerry Grens
]]>Donaldson pegged the risk of dying in an aircraft crash at 1 in 10 million. Shockingly, your chances of dying from a hospital error are much greater at 1 in 300. While that number is worldwide - Michigan hospitals are presumably less risky than the worldwide average - the number is still an alarming wake-up call for many patients.
]]> According to CTV News, the U.S. hospital infection rate is 4.5 percent. While that easily bests Europe (7 percent) and Canada (11.6 percent), it is still a troubling statistic. It indicates that nearly five of every 100 patients hospitalized in Michigan will suffer a potentially fatal infection.The WHO explains that these infections are often easily preventable, yet occur when doctors, nurses or technicians fail to wash their hands before making contact with patients. Some of the common infections derive from surgical site infections and urinary catheters.
Not only are these medical infections dangerous, but they often keep the patient in the hospital for a much longer stay, causing the patient more pain, suffering, medical expenses and time away from their home or work. If you are visiting a Michigan hospital, you should certainly consider asking your doctors and nurses if they have sanitized their hands.
Source: CTV News, "Hospital stays are riskier than flying, says WHO" Aug. 8, 2011.
]]>Logic suggests that claims of outpatient medical malpractice will continue to rise, as rising healthcare costs cause more patients to receive their medical care outside of hospitals, to avoid bills that include not only a physician's office, but also costs from the hosting hospital. However, the focus on medical error prevention remains on the inpatient setting.
]]> The AMA StudyThe malpractice study analyzed data from 2005-2009, comparing the payouts of medical malpractice claims between inpatient and outpatient settings. While inpatient medical errors still remain the larger category for malpractice claim payouts, it only holds about a four percent higher number of claims resulting in payout, versus outpatient claims (43 percent). This gap has been steadily narrowing each year. However, the underlying of nature of the medical malpractice claims tends to differ between the two settings.
In outpatient care, medical malpractice claims are most likely to fall into the category of misdiagnosis (46 percent), while surgical errors were the most common reason for inpatient malpractice claims (34 percent). Most medical claims from both inpatient and outpatient errors resulted in major injury or wrongful death of the patient.
Whether inpatient or outpatient, medical professionals must meet the requisite standards of care in treating their patients. When a medical error harms or kills the patient, the victim or surviving family should contact a reputable personal injury attorney experienced in medical malpractice claims.
Source: jama.ama-assn.org, "Paid malpractice claims for adverse events in inpatient and outpatient settings" 2011.
]]>