Illinois Medical Malpractice Blog

A study published last week in the British Medical Journal finds that half of US doctors prescribe placebos to their patients, instead of drugs necessary for their treatment. These placebos, the survey explains, are sometimes vitamins or drugs that will not help the patients’ conditions. Moreover, the survey finds that many of the physicians are engaging in these practices without the knowledge of their patients, contravening American Medical Association recommendations, which advocate that patients be given full knowledge of treatments that they are given, and potentially constituting medical malpractice.

Patients have the right to determine what they want they want done to their bodies. Before administering treatment or performing a medical procedure, a physician is required to provide his or her patient with adequate information about the treatment or procedure and the risks and benefits associated with it in order for the patient to give his or her informed consent. Failing to provide this information results in a lack of informed consent. If this failure causes the patient to suffer a personal injury or death, the doctor can be found liable for medical malpractice.

For the full story, click here.

After a woman had a cancerous lump removed from her breast, her doctor referred her to a specialist who uses a newer form of treatment where radioactive “seeds” are inserted in the tumor site. This procedure could be completed in only five days instead of the six weeks typically required for conventional treatment. This newer treatment has been performed on about 45,000 breast cancer patients in the country since the FDA cleared it for use. However, the patient sought a second opinion about this treatment and learned that it is still considered highly experimental. The MammoSite system is among the thousands of devices the F.D.A. lets onto the market each year only cursory review and with no clear evidence that they help patients. Doctors are free to use those products as they see fit, yet they do not have to inform patients that the devices are not proved. The doctors are frequently paid more by Medicare as a way to compensate them for the extra time and expense of adopting new procedures. This allows the unproven products to become widely adopted. Thus, there is a growing debate among cancer specialists on whether there is enough evidence to recommend the new treatment to woman who are not part of a clinical study. To read the full story, click here.

A state’s Supreme Court has upheld a $4 million award given to the family of a woman misdiagnosed with cancer. The woman was then given a lethal dose of painkillers. The court did throw out the $500,000 awarded in punitive damages to the woman’s family. The medical malpractice suit was brought by the daughter of the victim against the Hospice and the physician. The Hospice had settled their medical malpractice suit earlier for $1 million. The victim had been diagnosed in 2001 with pancreatic cancer and was sent to a hospice where she died about a month later. It turns out that the woman never had cancer. The victim had received massive doses of painkillers at the hospice for cancer, which an autopsy showed she never had. To read the full story, click here.

A state’s Supreme Court ruled that a circuit judge allowed improper evidence to be admitted in a medical malpractice case. The medical malpractice suit alleged that the victim suffered a pulmonary embolism as a result of physician malpractice. After the doctor did not respond to the complaint and summons, the judge entered a default judgment against her. At a subsequent damages hearing, the judge awarded the victim $500,000. The state Supreme Court later reversed the ruling on damages and ordered a new hearing. The doctor requested a jury trial, and the jury ruled in her favor. The victims appealed the decision, arguing that the judge should not have allowed the doctor to introduce evidence about the proximate cause of the victim’s medical problem because the question of the victim’s liability had already been resolved. The Supreme Court agreed with the victim and a new trial has been ordered. To read the full story, click here.

A family doctor who wrote prescriptions that could be linked to three deaths is still seeing patients, despite being under investigation by state authorities. His medical license has not been suspended, nor has his practice been restricted, even though several complaints against him have led to an investigation by the state medical examiners board. An expert has already stated that the doctor needs to have an emergency revocation of his license. The doctor prescribed more than 20,000 pills to a man who had sought treatment for pain streaming from a neck injury. The pills led the man to enter an addiction recovery program. Another patient overdosed from drugs prescribed by the physician. Records showed that she had been prescribed more than 150 painkillers a month and up to 300 extra-strength Xanax pills at one time. Although the doctor is under review, it is alarming that he is still able to write prescriptions. To read the full story, click here.

A jury awarded more than $11.4 million in medical malpractice damages to the family of a boy who suffered brain injuries from complications during his birth in August 2005. The jury found in favor of the plaintiffs who claimed their son’s brain injuries were caused by negligent care by a Hospital midwife and nurse during the delivery. The jury determined that the certified nurse midwife and the registered nurse were responsible but did not find that the doctor had any wrongdoing. In their suit, the family claimed the hospital staff failed to act appropriately and to deliver the baby in a timely fashion. Additionally, the family alleged that the midwife misread fetal monitoring strips that showed the baby was stress and should have called in the doctor when the delivery was not progressing as it should have. The trial lasted three-week and the jury heard testimony from experts who gave differing opinions on the quality of care and whether it played a part that left the baby with cerebral palsy and in need of constant care. The jury awarded the family $310,369 for past medical and heath care expenses; $5 million for future care; $387,00 for the child’s loss of earning capacity; $3.25 million for the child’s past and future pain, suffering and disability; and $2.5 million for the parents’ loss of society and companionship. To read the full story, click here.

Blacks and Hispanics who receive treatment for head injuries and other trauma are more likely to die afterward than whites with similar injuries and, regardless of race, trauma victims who lacked insurance died much more than those who were insured. The study offers the latest evidence of how race and insurance status affect patient outcomes. The data showed that trauma victims who were white and had health insurance fared better than blacks, Hispanics and the uninsured, even when the severity of the injury was the same. The study showed that uninsured and minority patients might be more likely to have pre-existing medical conditions that would lower their chances of surviving a serious trauma wound. They are also more likely to be treated in under-resourced hospitals that tend to have worse patient outcomes. This racial medical malpractice needs to be examined in order ot insure everyone proper health care. To read the full story, click here.

A young man with a heart valve condition was misdiagnosed by doctors at Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago, Illinois. The heart valve condition led to an infection in his hearts and the hospital repeatedly misdiagnosed it by sending the man home with allergy medication once and instructions on visiting a back specialist another time. The infection led to a stroke that left the man with severe physical and mental disabilities. The man settled his malpractice lawsuit against the groups representing the doctors and received $10.2 million that his wife says will be used to continue his rehabilitation and search or him to recover. The amount of the settlement was based on his projected future earnings. The man suffered a stroke after the infection was misdiagnosed. He still suffers from seizures, has no use of his right hand and has difficulty walking, talking and reading. To read the full story, click here.

Less than half of all Medicare recipients get a stress test before having common non-emergency procedures to reopen blocked coronary arteries, despite the fact that The American Heart Associations recommend it. A cardiac stress test, which is used to measure blood flow to the heart during exercise, can help determine who’s likely to benefit from procedures such as balloon angioplasty, in which a tiny balloon is used to reopen a blocked artery. A study in the Journal of American Medical Association found that only 44 percent of Medicare patients surveyed had a stress test before surgery. The article also stated that there might be confusion among doctors about when to choose surgical intervention over drug therapy for the treatment of coronary-artery disease. The article also linked doctors’ Medicare payment to how closely they follow these recommendations which could prevent unnecessary surgical procedures and medical malpractice suits. To read the full story, click here.

The leading cause of death in the US is coronary artery disease, or narrowing of arteries supplying blood to the heart. This condition results in a heart disease and failure to diagnose can lead to wrongful death. Doctors oftentimes make mistakes in diagnoses including: failure to take seriously a patient’s complaints, failure to notice or understand the nature of a patient’s symptoms, failure to order the proper tests, failure to properly read or interpret test results, and failure to refer a patient to a specialist for further testing or treatment. If doctors are negligent in these areas they may contribute a patient’s heart attack. Since 1.1 million Americans suffer heart attacks ever year, with 460,000 being fatal, it is extremely important that doctors are through in their examinations. To read the full story, click here.

A Chicago surgeon is being sued after implanting a device which he invented in a patient, allegedly without consent. The device, a Myxo ETlogix annuloplasty ring, was implanted in the patient in April 2006 by Dr. Patrick McCarthy at Northwestern Memorial Hospital to fix the patient’s leaky heart valve. Dr. McCarthy developed the heart device and receives royalties for its sale, which are donated to a charity. In July, a research paper by Dr. McCarthy was published in a medical journal. The article was based on a study that included the patient and focused on the initial experience with the device. Dr. McCarthy stated that the patient had consented to participate in the study. The patient said that she would not have consented to the use of an experimental device. The doctor denies that the device was experimental but failed to inform the patient that he had invented the ring before proceeding with the implantation. According to medical ethics experts, a patient should be informed if a surgeon will receive royalties on a device that he or she may use in surgery and a patient must agree to take part in medical research, by signing an informed consent form his or her to their involvement in the study.

The patient experienced inflammation following the implantation, was required to undergo a second surgery to remove the device, and is now confronted with the possibility of needing a heart transplant. She filed a lawsuit in Cook County this April against McCarthy, Northwestern Memorial Hospital and Edwards Lifesciences, the device’s manufacturer.

The FDA has received 10 reports on adverse events related to the Myxo ETlogix ring and an investigation is currently underway to determine whether the agency received proper notice about the device.

For the full story, click here.

One woman had an MRI performed on her foot after she injured her forefoot running. The MRI at a local radiology center found nothing wrong, so she decided to take an anti-inflammatory and do low-impact workouts. However, when the pain got worse she saw a sports doctor who performed another MRI, and she discovered she had a stress fracture in her foot. This happened to another man who had an MRI that did not reveal he had a nerve impingement that was so serious that he warned permanent paralysis if he did not have surgery. Oftentimes, patients are not made aware of the nature of the injuries because the MRIs are inconclusive. MRI’s differ because the quality of the imaging coils they put around the body part being scanned and the computer programs they use to control the imaging and to analyze the images all differ. Additionally, there is a huge variability in skill among the technicians doing the scans. Experts recommend that patients should go to radiology centers accredited by the American College of Radiology. They also state that you should check the credentials of the radiologist who read your scans. By using this advice, patients can avoid the risk of misdiagnosis and decrease the need for medical malpractice suits. To read the full story, click here.

Research shows that signs of heart disease are more likely to be blamed on stress when the patient is a woman. In two studies, 230 family doctors and internists were shown sample cases of 47-year-old man and a 56-year-old woman. Half the vignettes included sentences indicating the patient had recently experienced a stressful life event or appeared anxious. When the case study involved standard heart symptoms like chest pain, shortness of breath and irregular heart beat, there was no difference in the doctor’s advice for the man or the woman. However, when stress was included as a symptom, gender differences emerged. The presence of stress changed the way doctors interpreted a woman’s symptoms, prompting them to suggest psychological factors rather than physical causes, while this didn’t occur in men. When stress was listed as a symptom, only 15 percent of doctors diagnosed heart disease in women, while they diagnosed it in 56 percent of men. These findings could help explain why there is often a delay in the assessment of woman with heart disease. To read the full story, click here.

The family of one of the two victims in a fatal car crash is hoping to settle for ten million dollars in a wrongful death lawsuit. The victims were killed in a car accident after a woman, who was not supposed to be driving while taking medication, hit them. The suit is against the hospital and four of her doctors because they failed to tell her that she should not drive while taking the medicine. She had complained of dizziness while driving, and was still not informed that she should not drive while taking the medication. The driver was personally sued but has settled out of court. This type of medical malpractice, with lawsuits that hold the doctor liable for their patient’s actions, is rather new in the court system. For the full story click here.

The U.S. government has agreed to pay a family nearly $1 million to settle a medical malpractice case. The man was being treated for leukemia at the Veterans Affairs hospital in Salt Lake City in 2004 when he developed a severe infection and died. His family sued, claiming the hospital failed to give him antibiotics in time. He died of sepsis with a low-white-blood-cell count. The U.S. government agreed to settle the nearly 2-year-old case for $950,000 to cover general damages and future lost income. The hospital allegedly did not administer antibiotics when they could have and initially told the patient to take Gas-X instead of advising him to go to the emergency room. The man had just finished his last chemotherapy treatment and discovered he had diarrhea and abdominal pain. Without being administered antibiotics his white blood cell count lowered which led to a bacterial infection in his colon. The suit alleges that two doctors ordered antibiotics in the ER but that nurses failed to follow orders. The man was waiting to be plugged into his IV and was admitted to intensive care and placed on a ventilator, dying a few days later. To read the full story, click here.

Last year, the American Association for Justice (AAJ) launched its Fight for Justice Communications Campaign. The goal of the campaign is to forcefully make the AAJ case to the public and tell the true story about the civil justice system and tort reform. Sign up for the AAJ Rapid Response Team and you will receive up-to-the-minute alerts.

For more information.

The most important topic on the United State’s Supreme Court docket for the term may be the case of a musician from Vermont who lost an arm after a medical injection that went horrible wrong. At stake in the suit against Wyeth Pharmaceuticals is whether drug manufacturers are immune from claims they have faced from customers in thousands of cases, that the product label, despite approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, failed to warn the buyer about all known side effects. The ruling should show the court’s stance on business regulation and consumer protection but also its views on the relationship between the states and the federal government. The federal government sets labeling standards. To read the full story, click here.

A state medical board has reprimanded and fined a physician at a hospital in connection with a 2004 case in which a 40-year-old woman died while awaiting discharged. The woman came to the emergency room complaining of pain that she described as an “elephant sitting on [her] chest.” The doctor ordered standard lab work, a chest X ray and an EKG. The patient appeared to be improving, but then “experienced ventricular fibrillation” and died. A board-appointed peer reviewer found that the doctor’s actions failed to conform to minimum standards both as to diagnosis and to treatment. The doctor will be fined $5,000 and complete 15 hours of additional continuing medical education. The doctor will also pay $400 to the board as reimbursement of administrative fees and agree that a consent order will be placed on his physician profile. This is yet another example of how medical malpractice leads to a wrongful death. To read the full story, click here.

The American Association for Justice (AAJ) will host its Winter Convention in New Orleans from February 7-11, 2009. This is a great opportunity for medical malpractice attorneys, personal injury attorneys, and nursing home abuse attorneys to network and participate in business group practice meetings.

For more information.

A patient went in for a simply thyroid surgery and instead woke up with her chin gone, her nose deformed and her mouth so damaged that after a dozen reconstructive operations, she still has trouble eating, drinking and breathing. The jury in her medical malpractice suit awarded her $4 million. The doctors told her that an electrosurgical tool had ignited oxygen inside a mask under surgery drags during her operation which sparked flames that left second and third degree burns from her chest to her head. It turns out that surgical fires affect between 550 and 650 patients a year, including 20 to 30 who suffer serious, disfiguring burns. Every year, one or two people die this way. In one state, fires occur in one in every 87,646 operations. That amounts to 28 fires a year in that state alone. Experts estimate that fewer than half of the hospitals in the country conduct operating room drills to prevent and control fires. About 70 percent of surgical fires are ignited by electrosurgical tools that use a high-frequency electric current to cut tissue or stop bleeding; twenty percent are sparked by hot wires, light sources, burrs or defibrillators and 10 percent are touched off by lasers. It is outrageous that a person can walk into a surgical room without burns and exit with burns, and hospitals must do something to reduce this medical malpractice. To read the full story, click here.

The American Association for Justice (AAJ) will host a trial strategy seminar entitled “Weekend with the Stars: Justice Counts Seminar” for medical malpractice attorneys. The seminar will take place from December 13-14, 2008 in New York City. Highlights include insights into trial strategy and approaches to cases that are proven to work.

For more information.

A top government health official rejected pediatricians’ calls for an immediate ban on over-the-counter cough and cold medicines for young children, saying it might cause unintended harm. The pediatricians said they were uncomfortable with the lack of solid scientific data to support continued use of OTC remedies with youngsters, particularly from ages 2-6. The FDA believes a ban might only drive parents to give adult medicines to their youngsters. Pediatricians are urging the government to demand a recall of over-the-counter cough and cold medicines for children younger than 6. They claim the effectiveness of the medicines in children was never proven, and problems with the drugs send thousands of kids to the emergency room every year. The pediatricians say that over the counter products are ineffective for treating coughs and colds in children under 6, and should not be given because of the risk of serious side effects. Everyone agrees that these medications should not be given to anyone under the age of 2. To read the full story, click here.

A new report found that one of six liability claims against health care entities is associated with infections, injuries and other conditions acquired at the hospital. The 2008 Hospital Professional Liability Analysis found that hospital-acquired infections, hospital-acquired injuries, objects left in the body after surgery and pressure ulcers represent more than 12% of hospital liability costs. After Oct. 10, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services will no longer reimburse providers for 10 categories of hospital-acquired conditions and medical errors because they are considered preventable and should never happen. To read the full story, click here.

The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Public Health Service doctors who willfully fail to render appropriate diagnosis and treatment may be sued in constitutional tort action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. They agreed that the district judge that the Federal Tort Claims Act does not provide an “equally effective remedy” for such violations, the panel affirmed an order denying a motion by three officers and two civilian doctors employed by the service to dismiss on the grounds of absolute immunity. The complaint in question alleges that the victim died as a result of the defendant’s unwillingness to conduct diagnostic procedures that would have resulted in timely discovery that lesions on his penis were cancerous. The victim was a state prisoner and was told that while surgery “might be recommended long-term” the government did not consider his condition to be “threatening to life, limb, or eyesight” and therefore would not provide the operation. The public health service defendants moved to dismiss, arguing that they were absolutely immune because the plaintiffs had an equally effective remedy under the Federal Tort Claims Act, but that motion was denied. To read the full story, click here.

A patient had undergone a colonoscopy during which a benign polyp was excised and developed rectal bleeding at home. The patient claims he called the doctor twice and he told him it was nothing serious, but the doctor alleges he informed the patient to go to the emergency room. The patient reported to the emergency room the next morning and in addition to the bleeding he was found to have abdominal tenderness. X-rays showed free air and he underwent a partial colectomy and colostomy and eventually had the colostomy closed. The patient then developed a vernal hernia which required a third operation, and ended up settling his medical malpractice lawsuit. This medical malpractice case is amongst colonoscopies because bleeding and perforation are two major complications. Doctors need to explain this to all their patients in the pre-op colonoscopy. It is important to understand all of the complications when undergoing a colonoscopy. To read the full story, click here.