Illinois Medical Malpractice Blog

The Providence Journal recently reported on the end of a medical malpractice trial involving a problem hernia patch made by the firm Davol, Inc, which is owned by large medical device manufacturer C.R. Bard. This trial is only one case out of over 3,000 that have been filed involving the defective patch.

The plaintiff in this case, Christopher Thorpe, had the patch implanted in 2005 to fix a hernia in his abdomen. The patch is a sophisticated medical device that is folded in half and inserted through an incision behind a hernia. The patch’s “memory recoil ring” springs again once inside the body.

The problem began for Thorpe when the ring component surrounding the patch broke; the mesh portion of the product had been attached to the ring. The section of the ring that broke then traveled inside Thorpe’s body.

The breakage caused an abscess to form, leading to swelling and pain. The abscess had to be continually drained, and Christopher had to undergo multiple surgeries to fix the damage. The surgeries are still not completed, as he will face more of them to continue to correct the problem. As a result of the damage, he will only be able to lift 5 to 10 pounds for the rest of his life.

Ultimately, the jury determined that the poor design of the product caused the damage suffered by Thorpe and his family. They awarded Christopher $1.3 million for his injuries and $200,000 to his wife for her time spent treating his medical issues. Our Chicago medical malpractice lawyers at Levin & Perconti hope the best for Thorpe and his family. We also encourage anyone who has similarly suffered extreme consequences following medical device problems to contact a local lawyer to help explain the possible legal ramifications of the situation.

Researchers have long-known that woman are having C-section births at much higher rates than ever before. Amazingly, today nearly one out of every three children are born following the surgery. According to the Washington Post, that high rate makes C-sections the most common surgery at virtually all hospitals across the country.

While the rate increase was easy for experts to track, it was more difficult to understand the cause of the rise in these procedures as an alternative to natural birth. After all, in an ideal world, the surgery would not be necessary at all. The procedure poses many more risks to both the child and the mother when compared to healthy, natural childbirth. In addition, C-sections are more expensive than natural births—the increase in the procedure’s use has added significantly the country’s overall health care bill.

The downsides to the procedure have led researchers to help stem the tide by understanding the reasons for the rising use of C-sections. A recent study published in the American Journal of Obtetrics & Gynecology suggests some causes to the problem.

The researches ultimately found that many of procedures may be unnecessary. Historically, C-sections were used for those pregnancies that were known to be “problematic”—older mothers, previous C-section mothers, and similar cases. However, today even first time parents without clear problems seem to be getting the procedure at the same rate as other mothres, one out of three. Also, half of the C-sections that are performed occur in women who had their labor induced (initiated by the doctor) and before they were even dilated 6 cm. That suggests that more patients are picking when to begin labor and stopping the natural birth process very early after beginning labor. In other words, patients and their doctors may be using the process to conveniently schedule births, even though a healthier, natural childbirth would be possible.

Research into this area is still developing. New and more detailed information on the exact number of unnecessary C-section births is still forthcoming. But, it is no doubt clear that many of these procedures could be avoided with different medical care, planning, and advice. Our Chicago medical malpractice lawyers at Levin & Perconti have worked with many patients who suffered at the hands of problems during the delivery of children. Childbirth is inherently a risky medical situation, and everything should be done to ensure that risks of complications are lowered as much as possible. Patient’s trust their doctors to provide appropriate, timely, and clear medical advice on the risks and necessity of surgical procedures. For that reasons, all doctors need to ensure that unnecessary C-sections are limited.

Last year, St. Joseph Medical Center, located outside of Baltimore, sent a letter to nearly 600 former patients letting them know that stents that were inserted into their arteries by cardiologist Mark Midei were unnecessary. The letter suggested that they should go see a doctor to check on the status of the stents to determine the effect of the unneeded medical device on their body.

However, according the Baltimore Sun, now that hospitals officials realize that they are likely going to have to pay for the damages caused by these medical mistakes, they are refusing to admit that their error caused patients any damage.

Stents are small mesh tubes that help open clogged arteries to restore blood flow. They are also intended to help prevent the artery from bursting. Any patient who has been forced to undergo the medical procedure to have the stent inserted is likely to confess that it was an experience that they would otherwise not have wanted. Besides the emotional toll that these medical issues always take on individuals, many patients are also required to spend over $2,800 a year in annual blood-thinning drugs following the insertion. All patients with stents also have an increased risk of sudden blood clotting among other complications.

Mark Midei, the doctor charged with starting all of these problems by inserting the unnecessary stents was ultimately found to have altered information in some patients’ medical files. For example, in one case tests revealed that a certain patient had 40% blockage in their heart artery, but the doctor wrote in the medical file that the patient had an 80% obstruction and was in need of a stent. Money was the likely motivation for the negligent doctor. The more procedures he performed, the more money he earned—almost $1.3 million last year alone.

Instead of owning up to the mistakes and providing patients with the necessary costs for what they endured, the hospitals officials and their lawyers are dragging out the process. It is exactly for that reason that it is important to contact an attorney any time you feel you have been the victim of a hospital error. Our Chicago medical malpractice attorneys at Levin & Perconti have decades of experience fighting on your behalf against negligent doctors and hospitals. These legal battles require experience, legal skill, and persistence—something our attorneys possess in unlimited quantities.

Last year the St. Joseph Medical Center sent a letter to nearly 600 former patients letting them know that stents that were inserted into their arteries by cardiologist Mark Midei were unnecessary. The letter suggested that they should go see a doctor to check on the status of the stents to determine the effect of the unneeded medical device on their body.

However, according the Baltimore Sun, now that hospitals officials realize that they are likely going to have to pay for the damages caused by these medical mistakes, they are refusing to admit that their error caused patients any damage.

Stents are small mesh tubes that help open clogged arteries to restore blood flow. They are also intended to help prevent the artery from bursting. Any patient who has been forced to undergo the medical procedure to have the stent inserted is likely to confess that it was an experience that they would otherwise not have wanted. Besides the emotional toll that these medical issues always take on individuals, many patients are also required to spend over $2,800 a year in annual blood-thinning drugs following the insertion. All patients with stents also have an increased risk of sudden blood clotting among other complications.

Mark Midei, the doctor charged with starting all of these problems by inserting the unnecessary stents was ultimately found to have altered information in some patients’ medical files. For example, in one case tests revealed that a certain patient had 40% blockage in their heart artery, but the doctor wrote in the medical file that the patient had an 80% obstruction and was in need of a stent. Money was the likely motivation for the negligent doctor. The more procedures he performed, the more money he earned—almost $1.3 million last year alone.

Instead of owning up to the mistakes and providing patients with the necessary costs for what they endured, the hospitals officials and their lawyers are dragging out the process. It is exactly for that reason that it is important to contact an attorney any time you feel you have been the victim of a hospital error. Our Chicago medical malpractice attorneys at Levin & Perconti have decades of experience fighting on your behalf against negligent doctors and hospitals. These legal battles require experience, legal skill, and persistence—something our attorneys possess in unlimited quantities.

A heartbreaking story about a medical error that took the life of a 7-month old baby is being reported at KTLA News.

Tressel was the only child for Emilie and Scott Meinardi. Since birth, Tressel had heart issues; however, they knew that with surgery, the issues could be corrected. Last week the scheduled surgery date finally arrived, and the family headed to Cincinnati’s Children’s Hospital for the operation.

Tragically, Tressel would not make it out of the facility.

In the middle of the procedure, a technician made a terrible medical mistake. During the open-heart surgery, instead of flushing the baby’s system with saline, the medical staff member used alcohol. Of course, sending alcohol into the fragile baby’s body instead of the sterile saline solution had devastating effects on the child, eventually leading to Tressel’s death.

The medical error is similar to the one we reported on last week involving the baby who was accidentally given morphine. In addition we wrote recently about the problem with hospital tube manufacturing that makes these types of mistakes all too common. Hospitals, doctors, and manufacturers of these devices need to take a close look at these errors, understand exactly how to prevent them in the future, and ensure that no other patient falls victim.

Words cannot describe the devastation that family and friends suffer upon learning that a medical mistake took the life of their loved one—the pain is only compounded when an innocent child is lost. Our Chicago medical malpractice attorneys at Levin & Perconti have worked with families involved in these tragedies for decades. We offer sincere condolences to all those sufferings from this hospital mistake.

A New York Times article recently discussed an important issue is medical experimentation—what to do when new medical trials don’t work. Headlines are often littered with news of medical breakthroughs and new drugs that are supposed to help patients deal with previously untreatable problems. However, before reaching those important milestones, potential new treatments must go through various trial stages to test their usefulness.

Entire businesses have developed around finding patients to enroll in clinical trials for new drugs. Many patients and their families are very eager to join these projects, willing to do whatever it takes to find cures for their ailments. But hidden behind the glamor of new medical cures is the reality that many of these trials simply do not work. In fact, at times the new test drugs actually make patients worse.

Last week Eli Lilly, one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world, announced that it was halting two trials on what was previously a promising Alzheimer’s drug. Not only were the trial drugs not improving the test patients—it was actually making their condition worse. This is disappointing news and a sobering reminder of the risks associated with these new drug tests. It is extremely important for all patients who agree to take part in these trials to understand the potential for harm that exists any time medical professionals venture into uncharted waters.

These medical trials are important and necessary steps in improving the quality of healthcare. However, patients need to be fully informed about what they are getting into with these tests. Informed consent in this context should be the same as with any other medical procedure. Our Chicago medical malpractice lawyers at Levin & Perconti have fought for many victims of medical errors who did not give informed consent before the procedure that led to their harm. We fully support the same rights for those involved in medical drug trials.

We have previous posted the news of radiation violations which affected thousands of patients at Veterans Affairs hospitals across the country. Last week, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission finished its investigation into the incidents, and ultimately decided to fine the Department of Veterans Affairs $39,000 for the medical mistakes.

The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that the fine was levied after radiation safety violations were uncovered at 12 VA hospitals. This particular fine resulted for two separate incidents connected to the Department’s brachytherapy program. Brachytherapy is essentially the use of radiation to attack tumors in the body. It involves implanting dozens of radioactive seeds into certain glands in an effort to kill cancer cells over a period of months.

Radiation treatment obviously poses unique risks to those who need it. Our Chicago medical malpractice attorneys have fought for many patients who have suffered at the hands of radiation errors in various forms. The risk of mistakes in radiation is high, so obviously extreme care should always be used by medical professionals. However, The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission discovered that the VA failed to have any pre-operative procedures in place and failed to notify patients of errors following a failed procedure.

This is not the first punishment handed out to the Department for problematic radiation medical care. Earlier this year, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission hit the VA with a $227,500 fine after it was discovered that residents received incorrect doses of radiation over a six year period as part of their prostate brachytherapy treatment.

The repeated issues connected to the brachytherapy treatment vividly demonstrate that problems existed right from the start of the program, and doctors repeatedly failed to fix them. The medical mistakes affecting hundreds of our nation’s veterans have been noticed by many concerned with proper patient care. As Congressman John Adler argued, “The NRC has found widespread medical misconduct throughout the VA’s brachytherapy program. It is time the VA acknowledges and fixes their mistakes.”

The New York Times discussed a pair of studies that were recently released by the journal “Radiology.” The research suggests that physicians should take a new approach to limiting the exposure of patients to potentially dangerous doses of radiation during screenings for breast exams.

It is common knowledge that radiation can be harmful in large doses. Of course patients are exposed to lower levels of it during routine testing—x-rays and ultrasounds being some of the most common. However, problems arise when more complex testing is used that involves increased exposure to radiation. In particular, a few nuclear-based breast imaging tests used to screen for breast cancer involve injection of large amounts of radioactive material in patient bodies. These tests—known as breast-specific gamma imaging and positron emission mammography—are supposed to compliment regular tests but are often used liberally. They offer much more radiation exposure than regular mammograms. Specifically, experts believe that just one of these exams exposes a patient to the same radiation as the total they would get from a lifetime of yearly mammograms.

The radiation exposure ultimately increases some patients’ risk of getting other cancers, like those in the kidney and bladder. The risk for some patients of getting these cancers may be 30 to 40 times greater with the high exposure tests compared to the regular tests. Considering the side effects, the Radiology study indicated that it would be wise for physicians to more fully consider whether the test is actually necessary before ordering it.

Unfortunately changes are slow-going. Asa Mayo Clinic researcher noted, “This is something that isn’t well understood, not just by the public but by physicians who order the tests.” Physicist R. Edward Hendrick explained that this is caused by a misconception among doctors that all of these tests have similar radiation exposures, even though that is unequivocally wrong.

While exposing patients to the risks of excessive radiation is sometimes unavoidable, doctors need to do a better job of fully understanding the risk of the test before administering it. Our Chicago medical malpractice lawyers at Levin & Perconti have watched as doctors have refused to consider the risks of certain medical decisions that ultimately injure and kill innocent patients. We encourage all patients to pay close attention to each facet of their medical care to ensure that it is meeting the standards to which they are entitled.

The Morris Daily Herald recently posted a series of letters from advocates discussing the Illinois Supreme Court’s decision that found arbitrary caps of damage awards in certain lawsuits to be an unconstitutional abuse of the state legislative power. The state Supreme Court in that recent high-profile case, Abigaile Lebron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital, found that a small girl could not be limited in her damage recovery following a medical error that caused devastating injuries.

Travis Akin, executive director of the group Illinois Lawsuit Abuse Watch (I-LAW) published an article attacking the judges on the Illinois Supreme Court who made the decision. In criticizing the judges he postulated that they have “potentially reopened the floodgates, causing Illinoisans to worry if their doctors will be there when they need them.”

In response to Akin’s position, leaders of the largest public interest organization in Illinois, Citizen Action, wrote into the publication to express support for the state judges and to counter Akin’s misleading statements. As the group points out, far from being “activists"—basing new legal decisions off personal policy preferences—the 4 justices in the majority in the Lebron decision were following a long line of legal precedent dating back thirty five years. The legal principle separating the functions of the legislative branch of the state government and the judicial branch are well-established and important parts of the legal tradition. The law overturned in the case is simply not in compliance with the Constitution created by our state delegates and voted in by the public. We cannot allow one of the three co-equal governing branches infringe on the powers of the other.

Besides the foundational misunderstanding, Citizen Action also pointed out the quantitative evidence which undermines Akin’s position. Far from re-opening so-called “floodgates” of lawsuits, the striking down of the law is unlikely to have any effect other than preserving fairness in the justice system. Before the arbitrary cap was put into place in the state, medical malpractice lawsuits were actually decreasing.

Finally, Citizen Action mentioned the one group often forgotten in talks about medical malpractice—insurance companies. Unlike the unconstitutional law recently struck down by the state high court, a 2005 law that finally required insurance reform has been shown to be working exactly as intended. The law shone light on the rate-setting and payout figures of these companies, which spurred competition and lowered premiums.

Our Chicago medical malpractice lawyers at Levin & Perconti understand the emotions involved in the debate about medical malpractice caps. However, our decades of experience fighting for victims of medical errors has made clear that the real danger is not in driving away qualified doctors, but in insulating negligent doctors from taking responsibility for their mistakes. The justice system’s role in helping victims of those mistakes should never be limited by arbitrary legislative actions.

Last week we reported on a particularly troubling medical error, where a newborn baby was mistakenly given a dose of morphine by negligent medical professionals. Good Morning America did a segment on the incident yesterday that explains more about the near-fatal hospital mistake.

Jessica Blischke had just delivered triplets, all girls, when her doctors prescribed her morphine to help her recover from the painful C-section surgery. However, a nurse mistakenly mixed up the IV lines with that of one of her just-born daughters, Taylee. In an instant the infant received a dose of the powerful opiate 400 times more potent than is usually given to a child her size. As a result, Taylee stopped breathing, going slack and becoming blue in the face while her mother was holding her. Doctors were able to revive the newborn, and she clung to life on a breathing tube.

The medical professionals were befuddled as to the cause of Taylee’s condition, until they finally performed tests which revealed the opiates in the child’s system. However, instead of considering whether a hospital error had caused the problem, officials instead pointed the finger at Jessica. Medical staff assumed that Jessica must have been taking drugs, with the morphine entering Taylee’s system through her breast milk. Doctors may never have believed Jessica’s repeated denials, except for the fact that the other two infants (also breast fed) had no traces of drugs in their system.

Eventually the truth was revealed. The nurse who made the error was overworking—making the mistake at the end of a 12- hour shift.

Our Chicago medical malpractice lawyers at Levin & Perconti continue to be saddened by the thousands of families who are forced to endure the heartache of these medical errors. Luckily, doctors were able to save Taylee’s life following the incident. Almost 100,000 patients each year are not so lucky and die from these mistakes. There is simply no excuse for medical professionals to destroy lives in that way. Please contact a medical malpractice lawyer if you have suffered from a similar mistake.