Blog

Archive for the ‘Medical Malpractice Statistics’ Category

Increased Risk Of Birth Defects For Babies Conceived By Fertility Treatments

Wednesday, May 16th, 2012

Researchers reviewing Australian data regarding 302,811 pregnancies that occurred in Australia between January 1986 and December 2002 that resulted in live births, stillbirths, and terminations of the pregnancies found that the vast majority of the pregnancies were the result of “spontaneous conception” but that 6,163 were the result of fertility treatments. The researchers then studied the incidence of  birth defects diagnosed before the age of 5.

The researchers found a small but statistically significant increase in the risk for birth defects for babies who were conceived as a result of fertility treatments. The study involved both frozen and fresh embryos that resulted in pregnancies.

What Are Some Of The Techniques Used In Fertility Treatments?

The procedure known as “I.V.F.” (in vitro fertilization) involves multiple eggs being fertilized in a solution containing sperm after which the fertilized eggs are then implanted (some or all) into the woman. The procedure known as “ICSI” (intracytoplasmic sperm injection) involves a single sperm being injected into a single egg. The procedure known as ”GIFT” (gamete intrafallopian transfer) involves transferring the eggs and sperm to the woman’s fallopian tubes before the eggs are fertilized.

The study found that the risk of birth defects varied according to which technique was used and whether the embryos used were fresh or frozen. Overall (for all techniques), there was a 28% greater risk for birth defects involving heart, muscle, urogenital, and gastrointestinal defects, as well as an increased risk for cerebral palsy.

Notably, ICSI (the most common technique presently being used) had an increased risk of birth defects when fresh embryos were used but the risk was not increased if frozen embryos were used. For I.V.F., there was no significant difference in the risk for birth defects whether fresh or frozen embryos were used. The incidence of birth defects was 32% less likely when I.V.F. was used compared to ICSI.

The risks for stillbirth, low birth-weight, and delivery prior to 32 weeks were greater for women who had any fertility treatment when compared to the spontaneous conception women. For women who had spontaneous conception after previous fertility treatments, there was a 25% greater risk for birth defects.

What Conclusions May Be Drawn From This Study?

Infertility alone increases the risk for birth defects. However, a cycle of a single fresh embryo transfer using I.V.F. followed by transfer of a frozen embryo, if necessary, does not result in a significant additional risk of birth defects when compared to spontaneous conception.

Source

If you are pregnant or planning to become pregnant, it is imperative that you sit down with your health care providers to thoroughly discuss your medical situation, the options for care and treatment that are available to you, the risks and benefits associated with the options as they relate to you, their recommendations regarding your care and treatment (and their reasons for their recommendations), and any concerns or questions you may have regarding your current and future medical care and treatment. Other than hoping that competent health care providers are providing competent medical care at all times, the best means for avoiding a medical malpractice incident is a well-informed and pro-active patient participating in her own care and treatment decisions.

If you or a loved one have been injured as a result of medical negligence, a medical malpractice attorney may be able to investigate your possible medical malpractice claim for you and advise you regarding your legal rights and responsibilites in the matter.

Click here to visit our website or call us toll free at 800-295-3959 to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may be able to assist you with your possible medical malpractice claim and to represent you in a medical malpractice case, if appropriate.

Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.

You can follow us on FacebookTwitterGoogle+, and LinkedIn as well!

Pennsylvania Medical Malpractice Cases Level Off After Six Years Of Decline

Tuesday, May 15th, 2012

On May 7, 2012, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a report regarding medical malpractice cases filed during calendar year 2011 as compared to the prior six years. For 2011, there were 1,528 medical malpractice cases filed compared to 1,491 for 2010. In 2009, there were 1,533 medical malpractice cases filed, in 2008 there were 1,602 medical malpractice cases filed , in 2007 there were 1,641 medical malpractice cases filed , in 2006 there were 1,704 medical malpractice cases filed, in 2005 there were 1,711 medical malpractice cases filed, in 2004 there were 1,819 medical malpractice cases filed, in 2003 there were 1,712 medical malpractice cases filed, in 2002 there were 2,904 medical malpractice cases filed, in 2001 there were 2,659 medical malpractice cases filed, and in 2000 there were 2,632 medical malpractice cases filed throughout Pennsylvania.

The year 2011 had the fewest number of jury verdicts when compared to prior years. More than 70% of the jury verdicts in 2011 were defense verdicts. For each of the last six years, including 2011, the number of non-jury verdicts in medical malpractice cases was in the single digits.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court uses the calendar years 2000 through 2002 as the “base years” for comparing medical malpractice case filings per year. There was a 44.1% decrease in the number of medical malpractice cases filed in Pennsylvania in 2011 when compared to the base years (the medical malpractice case filings for Philadelphia, which is the judicial district with the largest caseload in Pennsylvania, decreased by more than 65%).

The probable explanation for the significant drop in medical malpractice case filings after 2002 (the last of the base years) is that just after the base years, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court made two significant rule changes that had a significant impact on the number of medical malpractice cases filed after the changes. One rule change required that medical malpractice attorneys obtain a certificate of merit from a medical professional that establishes that the medical procedure in the underlying the case fell outside the acceptable professional standard of care. The other rule change required that medical malpractice cases be filed only in the county where the medical malpractice allegedly occurred.

Source

What do the numbers mean? Well, it does not mean that there is less medical malpractice occurring in Pennsylvania or that physicians and other health care providers in Pennsylvania are now providing a better quality of care when compared to 2002 and in prior years.

What the numbers do mean is that the legal hoops that medical malpractice lawyers must jump through in order to obtain justice for their medical malpractice victims are higher and more numerous since the changes in the rules. While some “frivolous” medical malpractice claims may not have been filed after the changes to the rules, it is much more likely that the changes to the rules have resulted in a much greater number of valid medical malpractice claims not having been filed and medical malpractice victims and their families being left out in the cold. 

Who do the changes to the rules benefit most? The answer is that medical providers who commit medical malpractice that harms their patients will benefit most from the changes to the rules that make it more costly to file valid medical malpractice cases in Pennsylvania.

If you or a family member are the victim of medical malpractice in Pennsylvania or in another state in the United States, you owe it to yourself and your family to contact a medical malpractice attorney to investigate your possible medical malpractice claim for you.  

Click here to visit our website or telephone us toll free at 800-295-3959 to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may be able to assist you with your possible medical malpractice claim.

Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.

You can follow us on FacebookTwitterGoogle+, and LinkedIn as well!

$1.6 BILLION Pharmaceutical Company Payment For Off-Labeling Marketing

Tuesday, May 8th, 2012

The large pharmaceutical company Abbott Laboratories (“Abbott”) has agreed to pay $1.6 billion, the second largest payment by a drug company, to settle an investigation into its drug marketing practices (the largest payment was $2.3 billion that was paid by Pfizer Inc. in 2009). The $1.6 billion includes $700 million in criminal fines and forfeiture and $800 million to settle civil claims brought by states and the federal government.

Additionally, Abbott agreed to pay $100 million to resolve state consumer protection claims, to plead guilty to a misdemeanor violation of  the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, and to be subjected to court-supervised probation for a five year period.

The settlements, payments, and guilty plea are related to Abbott’s misbranding (improper promotion/marketing) of its drug named Depakote. The only uses of Depakote that are approved by the FDA are for treatment of epilepsy, bipolar disorder, and in the prevention of migraines. One of the known safety risks of Depakote is liver disease. Sales of Depakote reached $1.7 billion in 2007.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Abbott promoted Depakote in controlling agitation and aggression in elderly dementia patients as well as in treating schizophrenia, both of which were not approved uses of Depakote by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Such improper marketing is often referred to as “off-label” use.

Abbott admitted that the off-label use of Depakote for elderly dementia patients who were agitated or aggressive in nursing homes was actively promoted by a specialized sales force between 1998 and 2006 despite no credible scientific evidence that Depakote was safe and effective for such use (Abbott discontinued a clinical trial of Depakote’s use in treating dementia in 1999 due to adverse effects such as dehydration, anorexia, and drowsiness). Additionally, Abbott also admitted that it paid millions of dollars in rebates to pharmacists who serviced nursing homes based on how much Depakote’s use was increased in the nursing homes that they serviced.

Abbott further admitted that Depakote’s use for treatment of schizophrenia in combination with other drugs was actively promoted between 2001 and 2006 without evidence that it was any more effective than other medications alone in the treatment of schizophrenia (two studies of Depakote’s use in the treatment of schizophrenia that were paid for by Abbott failed to meet their goals, which Abbott did not report to its sales force for two years and which were not published for an additional two years).

The recently announced settlements will result in some ”whistle-blowers” receiving about $84 million as their share of the federal government’s recovery pursuant to the False Claims Act that provides for such incentives. The whistle-blowers had filed four lawsuits in federal court in Virginia regarding Abbott’s improper marketing promotion of off-label uses for Depakote.

Source

Without the monetary incentives provided under the False Claims Act for whistle-blowers, one must wonder if the illegal activities of a giant pharmaceutical company would have been discovered and punished.

If you have a possible whistle-blower claim against a drug company or other large company in the United States, you may wish to consult with a medical malpractice lawyer or other attorney who is knowledgeable about whistle-blower claims and handles such claims.

Click here to visit our website to be connected with whistle-blower lawyers in your local area who may be able to advise you regarding your whistle-blower responsibilities and possible monetary recovery and to assist you in filing a whistle-blower claim, if appropriate.

Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.

You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and LinkedIn as well!

Inappropriate Use Of Anti-Psychotic Medications In Nursing Homes

Thursday, May 3rd, 2012

Federal data recently reviewed by a major newspaper pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act request reveals that the inappropriate use of anti-psychotic medications for nursing home residents is rampant. Anti-psychotic medications are typically used in the treatment of severe mental disorders such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

About 185,000 nursing home residents in the United States during 2010 were given anti-psychotic medications when it was inappropriate to do so. More than 1 in 5 U.S. nursing homes used anti-psychotic medications for a significant percentage of residents who did not have psychosis or other serious mental conditions.

The use of anti-psychotic medications in patients with dementia is particularly dangerous, earning FDA black-box warnings regarding potentially fatal side effects. Anti-psychotic medications can cause dizziness, abnormal heart rhythms, a sudden drop in blood pressure, blurred vision, increased risk of deadly infections, cardiovascular complications, and urinary problems.

Nursing homes sometimes give anti-psychotic medications to combative or aggressive residents under the pretext of preventing the residents from harming themselves or others. However, the statistics seem to lend support to the belief that anti-psychotic medications administered to nursing home residents may be used to sedate and control residents who simply need more attention and care from nursing home staff — more care and attention means more time spent with residents, which in turn requires more staff time (and more staff), which means higher costs for nursing home owners.

The newspaper reported that at least 25% of nursing home residents without conditions recommended for anti-psychotic medication use nonetheless received the anti-psychotic medications in 21% of U.S. nursing homes in 2010. There was a direct link between the staffing of the nursing homes and their rate of use of anti-psychotic medications for their residents — the fewer the staff involved with the residents’ direct care, the greater the rate of anti-psychotic medication use for non-recommended conditions. The nursing homes that used anti-psychotic medications for conditions other than psychosis and similar mental conditions tended to have more residents that the nursing home staff identified as having behavioral problems such as wandering, verbal abuse, physical abuse, or being resistant to care, and the nursing homes themselves had a higher percentage of residents whose care was paid for by Medicaid and not by private insurance.

The newspaper reported that 10 nursing homes in California during 2010 administered anti-psychotic medication to all of their residents who were without psychosis or a related mental condition. On the other side of the spectrum, 146 nursing homes in the U.S. did not use anti-psychotic medications for their residents without psychosis or a related mental condition (that is about 1% of the nursing homes in the United States with at least 50 residents).

Source

If your family member or a loved one was mistreated, abused, or neglected in a nursing home in the United States, the assistance of a local medical malpractice attorney may help in investigating a possible medical malpractice claim against the nursing home.

Click here to visit our website or telephone us toll free at 800-295-3959 to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may be able to assist you in bringing a medical malpractice claim against the nursing home.

Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.

You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and LinkedIn as well!

Epidemic Of Drug Babies In The U.S.

Tuesday, May 1st, 2012

Babies born addicted to drugs due to their mothers’ use of illicit drugs during pregnancy is not new. However, an increasing epidemic of babies addicted to prescription medications, especially narcotics such as oxycodone, is particularly alarming.

Many such newborns will be born with neonatal abstinence syndrome (“NAS”), which is the withdrawal process they go through once they are born as a result of no longer being exposed to the drugs their mothers used during pregnancy (narcotic medications such as oxycodone pass through the placental barrier during pregnancy). In 2009, more than 13,000 newborns in the U.S. were born with NAS, a three-fold increase since 2000 (opiate use by pregnant mothers increased five-fold during the same period).

How many babies exposed to opioids during pregnancy go through withdrawal symptoms once they are born? Between 55% and 94%, according to official statistics.

Many NAS babies share common symptoms:  they are easily agitated, cry constantly (many have a distinct, high-pitched cry), they cannot be around sound or light, and they may have muscle tightening and seizures.

Tennessee’s Recent Experience With NAS Newborns

Tennessee ranks among the U.S. states with the greatest overuse of prescription drugs. About one-third of pregnant Tennessee women in state drug treatment programs are addicted to pain medications. In one particular Tennessee hospital, the number of NAS newborns doubled from 2010 to 2011. As a result, this same hospital responded by creating a new wing of private rooms in 2010 that are quieter and darker to help in the treatment of NAS babies.

The Tennessee hospital used to treat NAS babies in a manner similar to the treatment of older addicts — methadone treatment was used to stabilize the newborns who were then discharged to outpatient treatment. Due to safety and effectiveness concerns with the methadone treatment protocol for newborns, the hospital switched to morphine in small doses given every three hours during feeding that is gradually reduced over the following weeks to wean the babies off of the drugs. This newer treatment protocol has reduced the average hospital stay for NAS babies by several days, which now averages 24 days.

And it is not just at the time of birth and for the weeks following birth that NAS babies are at risk. Studies have shown that NAS babies are at an increased risk for learning problems and developmental problems throughout childhood and for behavioral problems as they reach school age.

Source

If you or a family member have become the victim of medical malpractice in Tennessee or in another state in the U.S., it is important to learn about your legal rights. The advice from a local medical malpractice attorney may help you determine if you can and should proceed with a medical malpractice claim.

Click here to visit our website to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may be willing to investigate your possible medical malpractice claim for you and to file a medical malpractice case on your behalf, if appropriate. You may also reach us toll free at 800-295-3959.

Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.

You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and LinkedIn as well!

Medical Malpractice Payouts Statistics For 2011

Monday, April 30th, 2012

An analysis of the medical malpractice payouts data reported for 2011 to the National Practitioner Data Bank was performed by Diederich Healthcare, which is a national medical malpractice insurance company that provides medical malpractice insurance and consulting services to over 13,000 healthcare professionals throughout the United States.

Six states represented 51.4% of all medical malpractice payouts in the United Sates during 2011. New York had the highest total of medical malpractice payouts ($677,866,050) followed, in order, by Pennsylvania ($319,710,250), Illinois  ($242,108,800), New Jersey ($221,170,750), Florida ($218,123,050), and California ($215,519,200). The states with the lowest total of medical malpractice payouts in 2011 were South Dakota ($3,033,750), Vermont ($3,938,250), Wyoming ($4,235,000), North Dakota ($4,852,500), and Alaska ($6,347,500).

The total medical malpractice payouts for 2011 was slightly lower than in 2010 (by 0.24%). Medical malpractice payouts by year have been decreasing since 2003, when the total medical malpractice payouts were the highest in the last 20 years ($4,822,485,800 in 2003).

Hawaii had the highest average medical malpractice payout ($686,509) and Indiana had the lowest average payout ($122,297).

The U.S. state with the largest number of medical malpractice payouts in 2011 was New York (1,744), followed by California (1,352), Florida (1,003), and Pennsylvania (903). The U.S. state with the fewest medical malpractice payouts in 2011 was Wyoming (11), followed by North Dakota (14), Alaska (16), and Vermont (20).

More than 36% of the medical malpractice payouts were for people from ages 40 to 59 ($737,338,400 for ages 0 to 19; $786,317,650 for ages 20 to 39: $1,351,743,100 for ages 40 to 59; $707,442,700 for ages 60 and over (ages were unavailable for people who received a total of $100,972,250 in medical malpractice payouts)).

58% of the medical malpractice payouts were for women and 42% for men.

Source

The raw data from 2011 do not explain the bases behind the numbers. For instance, what effect have tort reform laws in various states had on the number and the amount of the medical malpractice payouts in various states? And how would the number of medical malpractice payouts and the amounts of the medical malpractice payouts have been different without such tort reform measures?

Perhaps most important to medical malpractice victims in the past and for future medical malpractice victims in various states that have varying tort reform measures in place (or will enact tort reform measures in the future) is how many medical malpractice victims have not (and will not) receive fair and adequate compensation for their injuries and losses due solely to medical malpractice recovery limitations?

One conclusion regarding the medical malpractice payouts statistics for 2011 that cannot be made is that there were less medical malpractice incidents in the United States than at any time in the past — the imposition of procedural roadblocks and the severe artificial and arbitrary limitations placed on recoverable damages for medical malpractice claims in an ever-increasing number of U.S. states mask and hide the true monetary and societal costs in lives destroyed and families’ finances ruined as a result of medical negligence committed by careless, inattentive, incompetent, uncaring, or simply negligent health care providers.

When the heavy losses and permanent injuries associated with medical malpractice affect you or your family, the prompt advice from a medical malpractice attorney may help you decide how you should proceed with your possible medical malpractice claim.

Click here to visit our website or you may also contact us by toll free call to 800-295-3959 to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your local area who may be able to assist you with your possible medical malpractice case.

Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.

You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and LinkedIn as well!

48 Million Without Health Insurance In U.S. In 2011

Monday, April 23rd, 2012

According to the recently released results of a survey of 2,100 adults between the ages of 19 ad 64 in the U.S., about 48 million Americans (26%) were without health insurance for at least part of the year during 2011. Of those who had a gap in health insurance coverage in the U.S. in 2011, 69% were without health insurance for one year or longer and 57% had no health insurance coverage for two or more years. Job changes or job losses were responsible for most of the gaps in health insurance coverage — approximately 9 million Americans who lost their jobs between 2008 and 2010 that provided them with health insurance coverage became uninsured.

Almost one-half of the people surveyed indicated that they had tried to obtain health insurance coverage during the past three years but did not buy health insurance. Of those people, 62% indicated that the reason that they did not obtain health insurance was because the premiums were too high.

60% of the people surveyed who attempted to purchase health insurance coverage indicated that it was difficult for them to compare the various coverages of the different health care plans. Almost one-third of those surveyed indicated that the health insurance company refused to sell them a policy, raised the premiums that they would charge, or excluded pre-existing medical conditions.

The survey found that people without heath insurance are less likely to have their own regular doctor and are less likely to receive preventative medical care such as checking blood pressure and monitoring cholesterol levels.

Source

It is a national disgrace as well as a national financial burden that many Americans are living without health insurance coverage. Because so many people obtain health insurance coverage through their employer or their spouse/significant other’s employer, the loss of a job means not only the loss of income that is necessary to support a family, but also puts at serious risk the health of family members who can no longer afford the medical care they need — by putting off preventative medical care such as blood pressure monitoring and cholesterol monitoring, people are risking their health and well-being and may develop diseases that are diagnosed and treated at later stages when the chances of a cure are reduced and physical and mental suffering are increased.

When people delay medical treatment or forgo medical testing because they do not have health insurance to pay for the necessary medical care, the rest of society incurs the burden of the uninsured medical costs because it falls upon state and federal resources such as Medicaid to pay for the care that the uninsured receive in hospitals and in medical clinics.

Laws in the United States insure that children are able to receive a free education through adolescence, which all people recognize as essential to providing them with the minimum opportunities to succeed in life. Perhaps it is time for laws to insure that all people in the United States are provided with health insurance coverage and medical care opportunities to insure that they receive at least the minimum level of medical services necessary to live and maintain a healthy existence.

If you or a loved one have suffered injuries or losses as a result of possible medical malpractice in the United States, you may wish to consult with a local medical malpractice attorney who may be able to investigate your possible medical malpractice claim for you.

Click here to visit our website or telephone us toll free at 800-295-3959 to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may be able to help you with your possible medical malpractice case.

Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.

You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and LinkedIn as well!

Lyme Disease In Maine During 2011

Sunday, April 22nd, 2012

Lyme disease is transmitted to people through the bite of a deer tick (Ixodes scapularis) infected with the bacteria Borrelia burgdorferi. The first documented case of Lyme disease that occurred in Maine was in 1986. Lyme disease in Maine has increased each year from 2003 to 2011 (except for 2010, for unknown reasons).

Report to the Maine Legislature from the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention dated February 1, 2012 provides some insights into the recent experiences involving Lyme disease in Maine. The Report stated that there were 981 confirmed and probable cases of Lyme disease in Maine during calendar year 2011.

The reported symptoms of Lyme disease in Maine for 2011 included the characteristic expanding bulls-eye rash (erythema migrans) in 49% of the cases (484 cases); arthritis (joint swelling)  in 32% of the cases (314 cases); and, neurological symptoms such as Bell’s Palsy in 10% of the cases (97 cases). (Reported Lyme disease cases could include more than one symptom.)

The Report included the following findings regarding Lyme disease in Maine during 2011:

Lyme disease patients had to be hospitalized in 5% of  the cases (50 cases).

Symptoms of Lyme disease were first experienced during June, July, or August in 54% of the cases (the date when the symptoms first appeared were not reported in 20% of the cases).

Adults between the ages of 45 and 64 had the highest number of cases of  Lyme disease.

Symptoms Of Lyme Disease

One of the commonly noted symptoms of Lyme disease is the formation of an expanding rash often described as a “bulls-eye rash” at the site of the tick bite between 3 and 30 days after the tick bite. Other common initial symptoms of Lyme disease include fever, headache, joint pain, muscle pain, and fatigue during the first several weeks. Later symptoms of Lyme disease may include arthritis in one or more joints (the knee is most common), Bell’s palsy and other palsies, meningitis, and carditis.

Diagnosis Of Lyme Disease

Lyme disease is diagnosed by clinical findings and with the assistance of lab tests. Patients should be treated for Lyme disease based on the basis of clinical findings – in a geographic area known to have Lyme disease, the appearance of an erythema migrans even without laboratory confirmation is enough to diagnose Lyme disease.

Laboratory testing is based on a two-tier testing algorithm. The first test is known as an Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbant Assay (ELISA). If the ELISA is positive or equivocal, it is followed by an IgM and IgC Immunoblot (an IgM Immunoblot is reliable only if done within 30 days from the onset of symptoms).

Treatment Of Lyme Disease

Most cases of Lyme disease can be effectively treated wth oral antibiotic for 10 days to a few weeks. If the nervous system, joints, or heart are involved, IV antibiotics for up to 28 days may be necessary. Lyme disease is rarely fatal.

Chronic Lyme Disease?

An important and controversial issue with regard to Lyme disease is whether Lyme disease can persist as a chronic infection that can be treated successfully with an extended course of antibiotics. A panel that recently reviewed the clinical practice guidelines for Lyme disease that were established in 2006 determined that there was no convincing evidence for the existence of chronic Lyme infection and that long-term antibiotic treatment of so-called chronic Lyme disease is unproven and unwarranted. (The CDC warns that the inappropriate use of IV antibiotics can lead to deadly blood infections, serious drug reactions, the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria,  C-diff. diarrhea, and other serious medical conditions.)

We would recommend that anyone concerned about Lyme disease or who lives in an area affected by Lyme disease (especially from Maine to Maryland) take the time to fully read the Maine Report because it contains a vast amount of timely and useful information about Lyme disease that may help you, your family, and your pets avoid exposure to Lyme disease and help you obtain timely and appropriate medical attention and treatment if you suspect that you may have been exposed to Lyme disease.

If you or a family member became infected with Lyme disease and it was either not timely diagnosed or not timely and appropriately treated by a health care provider, you may have a claim for medical malpractice for the misdiagnosis, late diagnosis, or the failure to diagnose and treat your Lyme disease that resulted in injuries or losses to you or your family.

Click here to visit our website or call us toll free at 800-295-3959 to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your local area who may be able to investigate your possible medical malpractice claim for you and file a medical malpratice case on your behalf, if appropriate.

Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.

You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and LinkedIn as well!

Surgical Fires

Wednesday, April 18th, 2012

The last place you would expect to suffer burns from a fire would be while lying on a table in an operating room. But that is just what happened to a New York woman who was undergoing a Cesarean-section delivery of her baby on March 12, 2010. While she was under the influence of local anesthesia with her view obstructed by a surgical curtain, the mother-to-be smelled something burning and could see smoke. Her obstetrician who was performing the surgery noticed a flame coming from the woman’s left side and patted the flame to extinguish it, telling his patient that there had been “a little fire” but not to worry.

The woman gave birth to a healthy baby but she suffered a 5 by 7 inches area of third degree burn on her left side where an alcohol-based antiseptic had been used to prepare her for surgery. The antiseptic, known as DuraPrep, was manufactured by the large manufacturing company, 3M Company. One month before the woman’s surgery, 3M Company, at the direction of the FDA, had issued a new warning to hospitals regarding DuraPrep’ s flammability and instructed hospitals on how to prevent fires, which the surgical staff providing care to the woman was unaware of.

The woman has filed a medical malpractice case against her obstetrician and the hospital where her surgery occurred, alleging that they failed to follow the recommendations from 3M Company regarding use of DuraPrep. The woman had to have plastic surgery for her burn injury and the area that was burned constantly feels numb and feels like it will tear open.

The obstetrician had used DuraPrep for 20 years before the woman’s surgery, without any fire incidents. The hospital stopped using DuraPrep for a period of time but reinstated its use with procedures in place to prevent fires.

The fire evidently started when the obstetrician was using an electrical cautery tool that may have caused a spark that ignited the fumes from the DuraPrep that was not allowed to dry prior to the procedure (3M Company instructed that DuraPrep must be allowed to dry completely before being exposed to a flammable source). A fire would also be possible if the DuraPrep soaks into the patient’s gown or into surgical drapes or somehow pools around the patient (the woman’s anesthesiologist testified during a deposition in the medical malpractice case that the anesthesiologist had noticed that the woman’s gown was wet with what could only have been DuraPrep, after the fire).

Of the 50 million surgeries performed each year in the United States, there are only between 400 and 600 surgical fires involving patients, with only 4% of those fires involving skin preparation solutions such as DuraPrep.

Source

Surgical fires are so rare that when they do occur, an investigation into the incident by a medical malpractice attorney may help determine if the cause of the fire and the resulting injuries to the patient were due to medical malpractice.

If you or a loved one have been injured due to a surgical fire or other medical incident that may have been the result of medical negligence, click here to visit our website or call us toll free at 800-295-3959 to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may be able to investigate your possible medical malpractice claim for you and file a medical malpractice lawsuit on your behalf, if appropriate.

Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.

You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and LinkedIn as well!

Study: Improving Economy Associated With Rise In Nursing Home Deaths

Monday, April 16th, 2012

A recently published research study by a well-respected nonpartisan research group operating under a grant from the Social Security Administration found that during improving economic times when lower-paid nursing home staff seek and obtain better paying jobs elsewhere, there are additional deaths of people over 65 (especially for women over 65) and that overall mortality rates rise with the rising economy. Therefore, there is a basis for concluding that when the economy is expanding, nursing home staff are reduced and become scarce and that deaths among elderly residents in nursing homes rise as a result.

Prior research has shown that death rates in the United States rise during periods of low unemployment and fall as unemployment rates rise. The reason for such is believed to be that health is negatively effected and mortality is thereby increased during periods of economic growth when increasing employment rates may result in increased job-related stress, less time for leisure and physical activities, less attention to a good diet, etc.

The recent study found that for each one percent decrease in the unemployment rate, the mortality rate for men increased by one-quarter of one percent and the mortality rate for women increased by four-tenths of one percent with the increase being the same for women over 65 (women over 65 are typically not employed and therefore job-related causes for the increase in the death rate for women over 65 would not be an explanation for the increase in the death rate for this population).

In nursing homes, the rate is even greater and statistically significant: a 0.56% increase in deaths in nursing homes for every one percent decrease in the unemployment rate. And mortality increases in states with higher percentages of their populations who are in nursing homes.

The deaths of men and women over 65 accounted for seventy five percent of the additional deaths, with women in this age group accounting for fifty five percent of the additional deaths. The study also found that the changes in the death rates for people 65 and older were principally associated with changes in the employment of younger adults. Therefore, the researchers looked into the level of nursing home employment (in which most of the residents are elderly and there are more female residents than male residents since women tend to outlive men) to attempt to find the reason that more of the elderly die as unemployment is falling.

Prior research has shown that the ability of nursing homes to hire lower-paid staff such as nursing aides decreases as the economy improves as these lower-paid employees find higher-paying jobs in other areas of the economy (a one percent decrease in the unemployment rate equates to a three percent percent decrease in nursing home aides and more than two percent decrease in nurses).

Therefore, it appears that the research indicates that a greater scarcity of nursing home aides may have a direct and significant impact on nursing home residents, resulting in nursing home residents dying in greater numbers as the unemployment rate decreases.

Source

The research would support the common-sense requirement that nursing homes must maintain sufficient levels of care-giving staff in order to provide appropriate care to their nursing home residents. When nursing homes choose to reduce their staff or fail to employ sufficient staff for their residents, the residents suffer serious consequences as a direct result of the insufficient staffing levels.

If you or a loved one suffered injuries or death as a result of inadequate nursing home staffing and/or as a result of nursing home neglect, nursing home negligence, or nursing home abuse, you should promptly consult with a medical malpractice attorney to determine if you may have a medical malpractice claim against the nursing home for the inadequate or negligent care.

Click here to visit our website to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may be able to investigate your possible claim against a nursing home or call us toll free at 800-295-3959.

Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.

You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and LinkedIn as well!