Illinois Medical Malpractice Blog

The Illinois Department of Financial Professional Regulation has posted a new website database where you can find out more about your doctor or health care professional. The Physician Profile Search allows visitors to see where the doctor went to medical school, if the doctor has been involved in any lawsuits, and determine if the doctor is licensed to practice.

Find the Physician Profile Search here.

The generally accepted medical opinion for decades has been that diabetes patients should lower their blood sugar in order to reduce the risk of death from heart disease. However, a recent extensive federal study has been cut short after the middle-aged and older participants had a higher risk of death after lowering their blood sugar. For people with diabetes, lowering blood sugar can have benefits such as protecting against kidney disease, blindness and amputations. The increased risk of death exposed in the study has been alarming in the medical community. Doctors have frantically began searching for an explanation.

Click here for the full article

The United States ranked worst among 19 leading industrialized nations in preventable deaths due to treatable conditions. France, Japan and Australia were ranked the highest. The study that created this ranking showed that if the United States had preventable death rates more comparable to those countries, there would be 101,000 less deaths in the US each year. The parameters for deaths counted in this study were those that could have been prevented if patients had access to effective and timely health care. The 47 million Americans lacking health insurance accounted for a large percent in the US preventable deaths, but deaths contributed to by medical mistakes are also frighteningly prevalent. The president of the company that backed the research, Commonwealth Fund (a New York-based health policy foundation), Cathy Schoen said, "The fact that other countries are reducing these preventable deaths more rapidly, yet spending far less, indicates that policy, goals and efforts to improve health systems make a difference."

Click here for the full article

The Illinois Hospital Report Card, the Illinois Consumer Guide to Health Care and another project meant to monitor medical malpractice issues in Illinois hospitals were groundbreaking and exciting initiatives passed in the state in the last four years. However, not much has been done to follow through on these laws. The Chicago Patient Safety Forum has been a strong critic of the delays in implementation even though last year's Patient Safety Summit in Chicago produced few results. The purpose of the laws was to provide the public with information about their doctors and the medical mistakes they make as well as the hospitals and issues like hospital-acquired infections.

One goal of this legislation was to examine instances of medical malpractice such as birth injuries and surgical errors. The Illinois Hospital Report Card was meant to monitor hospital-acquired infections and if the hospitals are adequately screening patients. It also was to focus on the quality and skills of nursing staffs. The lack of progress has been blamed on problems with the legislation itself, a lack of funding and staff, and bureaucratic delays. Legislators and other officials alike, such as the Illinois Hospital Association, have stated that patients have the right to be informed about their doctors and hospitals.

Click here for the full article

Illinois participated in the nation-wide trend to pass legislation making it mandatory to publish health care "report cards" disclosing information about hospital acquired infections and medical malpractice. But while over a dozen states have begun posting the information on the internet, Illinois has yet to move forward with the initiative. Many states publish more specific report cards dealing with "never events," or mistakes that should never happen, but do. Some examples of "never events" include performing surgery on the wrong patient or body part and other inexcusable examples of negligence. Illinois plans to publish a report, but progress has yet to be seen.

Click here for the full article

All patients being treated in hospitals, whether for serious surgery or routine procedures, should be made aware of Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus (MRSA), an infection acquired during hospitalization. 100,000 people die of MRSA annually. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that one out of every 22 patients will acquire an infection during hospitalizations totaling 1.7 million patients a year. It is also estimated that out of that group, 99,000 would die. MRSA has recently been proven as avoidable in many cases. Pittsburgh Veterans Hospital has cracked down on doctor hygiene and hospital cleanliness, while taking other minor precautions and has noticed a decrease in MRSA infections. According to the hospital's chief of staff, "the infection control program cost about $500,000 a year, including test kits, salaries for 3 workers, and the $175-per-patient cost of gloves, gowns and hand sanitizer. The hospital... realized a net savings of nearly $900,000 when the number of infected patients fell." Hospitals should take note, especially since Medicare will no longer pay for "preventable" conditions induced by carelessness or medical malpractice in hospitals. One of the "preventable" categories is certain types of hospital-acquired infections. The hospitals themselves will have to cover these often enormous amounts.

Continue reading "Avoidable infections acquired in hospitals kill 100,000 a year" »

The Illinois legislature has passed, and the governor has signed, legislation requiring the screening of hospital patients for drug-resistant staph infections. The MRSA (methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus) infections infect over a million patients and kill tens of thousands every year. MRSA is the most common infection acquired in hospitals and Illinois is leading the nation in confronting the controversial issue. The law becomes effective immediately. Hospitals are now required to test all patients in intensive care units for MRSA and isolate patients with the bacteria. The bill was controversial because some hospital infection control practitioners claimed it would hinder response times to emergency threats. The same group introduced legislation requiring hospitals to prevent the spread of infection by analyzing which infections posed the most risks at different facilities. Although this bill was intended to replace the MRSA bill, both were passed into law. Fortunately for patients, the bills are aimed at protecting patients from unnecessarily contracting dangerous infections in hospitals.

Click here for the full article

The search for the solution to reaching a better balance between cost and quality of doctors and hospitals has reached an important turning point. A recent court ruling opens consumer access to specific data from the Medicare claims database of doctors. A consumer group sued the Health and Human Services Department asking for the disclosure of this information involving about 40 million patients (who will not be disclosed) and over 700,000 doctors. An appeal of this ruling seems unlikely as one of the Bush administration's initiatives is to improve price and quality transparency of medical providers. Furthermore, support to open the Medicare database for public access is rising in the Senate. This ruling will allow patients to see how many of a certain type of procedure a doctor has performed successfully and if the tests ordered by doctors are necessary, which will help to reduce the cost of treatment.

Click here for the full article

Illnesses, injuries and infections caused by medical mistakes or negligence in hospitals will no longer be covered by Medicare, the government health insurance program for senior citizens. This new initiative can save the lives and wellbeing of patients because it will make doctors and hospitals more accountable for preventable errors and force them to adhere more closely to policies and procedures. Private insurers are considering implementing a similar policy, which could save Americans money.

The preventable conditions that will not be covered by Medicare include surgical tools left inside patients after surgery, incompatible blood or air embolisms, bedsores or pressure ulcers developed during a hospital stay, injuries resulting from falls in the hospital, and infections caused by extended use of catheters in blood vessels or the bladder and infections at a surgical site after coronary artery bypass surgery. Some hospital spokesmen have expressed concerns that, for instance, bedsores are sometimes unpreventable. The conditions that have been chosen to be excluded from Medicare coverage are not arbitrary, however. They have been chosen by experts that believe they can be reasonably prevented. Levin & Perconti, for example, settled a case for $1 million recently when a nursing home claimed that a patient’s severe pressure sores were not avoidable. The patient, however, was able to completely recover when moved to a different facility. The included injuries were chosen by experts and stand as federal recognition that they are avoidable and can be prevented by stronger adherence to policies and procedures.

Click here for the full article

The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP) have issued an alert regarding Propofol, and anesthetic commonly known as Diprivan. Several clusters of patients have reported experiencing chills, fever and body aches after being administered the drug. If you or someone you know has received Propofol for sedation of general anesthesia and subsequently experienced fever, chills, and body aches or other symptoms please make a report to the MedWatch program. Those patients should also be evaluated for bacterial sepsis. At this point, no product liability lawsuits have been filed.

Click here to view the FDA alert

A recent report regarding medical malpractice in Pennsylvania, focusing on surgical errors, was recently released by the Patient Safety Authority. 175 errors were made in the state during the past two and a half years, not including 253 close calls. These errors can lead to serious physical and financial strain, or even wrongful death. "Wrong-site" surgeries are a persistent problem and are clearly avoidable. Pennsylvania is a leader in public accountability for medical and surgical errors. In an effort to reduce the costs of health care, the Governor proposed that the state should cease to pay for care involving hospital-acquired infections, wrong-site surgeries, and other instances of medical malpractice. It is also the only state that requires hospitals to report near-misses.

The report cited wrong-site surgeries including the removal of a patient's healthy thyroid and incorrect cancer diagnosis as the result of a laboratory mix-up, an incorrect incision on the wrong side of a brain injury patient's head, and a surgeon inserting a needle into a patient's right knee when the surgery was planned for the other leg. In 83 reported cases of wrong-site surgeries in the state, the procedure was completed before the mistake was detected.

Click here for the full article

States are beginning to make information regarding quality and costs of medical services at different hospitals in the state available to the public. And the information shows that there is no correlation between cost and quality of care. In the study, it was shown that the two highest paid hospitals in the state actually had death rates that were higher than expected. The study also illuminated the problem that good care can go unrewarded; one hospital with a high success rate in a large number of bypass surgeries, for instance, was paid an average payment less than half the amount of the state average.

Insurance providers are aware of the fact that their payment policies and practices do nothing to promote better care in hospitals. Medicare, for example, pays a relatively flat fee depending on location and type of hospital rather than outcome or quality of care. Medicare pays for the services hospitals provide, even if those services are only necessary because of medical mistakes or avoidable hospital infections. This study may put more pressure on insurance carriers and hospitals to be more transparent regarding quality of care, and may give insurance companies a reason to consider distinctions in the care provided.

Click here for the full article

A study conducted shows that there is no connection between the quality of health care provided and the cost of that health care. The study compared the costs of a given medical procedure against the length of hospital stay required or against the death rates associated with that procedure. Suprisingly, there not only seemed to be no correlation between an increase cost of health care and an increase in the quality of that care, but the most expensive health care providers actually provided lower quality care in some instances.

Continue reading "No connection between health care quality and cost" »

The FDA recently approved a new use of the YAZ birth control pill to allow it to treat moderate acne. With this approval, the drug becomes the first oral contraceptive approved for three distinct uses: birth control, acne control, and relief from symptoms of premenstrual dysphoric disorder.

For the full article.

Because of the recent public disgust over withdrawn drugs, the FDA is proposing closer government scrutiny of new drugs. The pilot program will issue drug “report cards” that would detail unexpected side effects that emerge during the first 18 months following the drug’s approval. The report cards will also record how the drug is being used. This aspect of the proposal will be a big improvement in light of the recent issues of drug companies marketing their drugs for unapproved uses.

For the full article.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) was shocked to discover that many of its scientists had not adhered to the ethical restrictions imposed and were making outside income from private consulting deals with drug and biotechnology companies. NIH put new ethics rules in place after last year’s discovery and now ban all outside income from drug and biotechnology companies. An estimate of 40% of the scientists conducting hands-on research at NIH are now looking for alternative employment. In the enactment of the new rules, officials emphasized that the new ethic rules will boost the agency’s credibility with the public. With pharmaceutical companies attempting to exert influence on both researchers and doctors, NIH will certainly gain integrity by staying far away from such monetary influence.

To read the full article.

Getting through one state's medical disciplinary process is like getting through an obstacle course filled with loopholes and opposition. After experiencing a traumatic medical experience, victims begin an arduous journey that could take more than seven years.

First, a victim of medical malpractice files a complaint. Next, the complaint and case file are sent to an investigator who reviews documents, interviews witnesses, and issues a report. The investigator then sends the case and his report to a prosecuting attorney who collects more evidence. The prosecutor is then given discretion whether or not the case should continue. If the victim’s complaint makes it through this obstacle, it soon faces another one: the probable cause panel. This panel determines whether there is enough evidence to send the case to the full board. In the event that the victim’s case passes this barrier, they finally face the medical board who ultimately decides the proper punishment for the physician.

Though grateful for making it this far in the process, the victim at this stage still faces two huge obstacles. First, the board is composed of 15 governor-appointed members, 12 of whom are themselves physicians. Second, the victim has a heavier burden than in civil matters. In civil cases, victims must prove that a physician is liable by a “preponderance of the evidence,” while the Florida medical disciplinary process requires “clear and convincing evidence.”

Continue reading "One state's lengthy medical disciplinary process overflows with obstacles and offers little justice" »

In response to the study released earlier this month from the Archives of Internal Medicine concerning doctors’ disclosure preferences, an article from the Times examines whether doctors fearful of lawsuits and those practicing in tort reform states have the same disclosure preferences. The answer: yes.

Doctors in Canada for example, fear lawsuits significantly less than those in the United States due to paying less for malpractice insurance, cases being heard by judges, not juries and caps on damages for pain and suffering. However, these doctors are just as reluctant to fess up to their mistakes as those in states in the United States labeled as so-called medical malpractice “crisis” states.

For the full article.