Illinois Medical Malpractice Blog

A new study suggests that claims of medical malpractice verdicts in Illinois spiraling out of control are greatly exaggerated. The study analyzed Illinois jury verdicts and settlements since 2002 by county. In contrast to claims that juries are awarding Plaintiffs millions-upon-millions in frivolous lawsuits, the study concluded that Plaintiffs prevail at trial in only about 1 out of 3 cases, with median verdicts at about $1 Million. The same holds true for settlements with most offers being characterized as de minimis especially when factoring in the high costs associated with a medical malpractice and negligence case. This study also dispensed with the myth that a medical malpractice case in Illinois could only succeed in Cook County. Statistically, there appears to be little difference in either the success rates or size of the verdicts when comparing Cook County to the rest of Illinois. Altogether, the study shows that criticisms of medical malpractice claims in Illinois are greatly exaggerated.

For the full study, click here:

A trend is emerging where patients in need of medical care are going abroad for surgeries. This trend is in response to rising health care costs in the U.S., a function of insurance companies increasing rates to maximize profits. However, there are numerous risks associated with major medical procedures abroad. Initially, the level of care may not be the same given different licensing requirements and regulations. Further, patients may be exposed to substandard protections against infection and the spread of disease. The American Medical Association has expressed concern over the standard of care in other countries and is not yet convinced that the purported benefits outweigh the costs. For patients that do seek care outside the U.S., it is important to see a U.S. physician for a follow-up upon reentry. These patients must also keep in mind that surgery and travel often do not mix.

For more information, click here:

A Midwestern woman recently was awarded $2.75 Million following an incident of medical malpractice and negligence. Physicians failed to test a tumor that was removed from her foot, which had they tested it, would likely have tested positive for melanoma cancer. Instead, one year later, another tumor was removed that, when tested, revealed the cancer. However, due to state damage limit laws, she will likely only receive $1.25 Million.

For the full article, click here:

Following the lead of a Midwestern hospital, facilities throughout the country are taking a novel approach to medical malpractice – honesty. In an effort to limit liability, hospitals are calling patients’ families for meetings where they inform the family members that their loved one died, not because of natural causes, but physician malpractice or negligence. Surprisingly, the approach has worked to the extent that most family members appreciate an honest account of the cause of death.

However, there is an invidious motive behind this new policy. Hospitals are finding that by calling family members into their facility and telling them what happened, they are able to force ignorant or misinformed grieving family members into an emotional decision to settle before even consulting an attorney. This has the potential to create problems where settlements are far below fair compensation for the pain and suffering experienced by the family or even insufficient to cover basic medical expenses. Many of these cases involve gross negligence on the part of physicians where a patient is administered the wrong medication or a fundamental test is not performed that could have prevented death.

Ultimately, the policy of honesty has potential in wrongful death situations. However, patients and family members should be cautious when faced with a sudden decision to settle. At the very least, these individuals should avoid making an emotional decision on-the-spot. To this extent, consulting an attorney would help improve and refine this new approach to medical malpractice.

For further information, click here:

A state legislative agreement was announced today that will publicize the names of doctors charged with misconduct and will give those doctors just one day to produce office records demanded by investigators. The measure is in response to a case where a physician improperly exercised controls over infections resulting in notifications to 10,000 patients that they may be infected. The physician had infected at least one patient with hepatitis C by reusing syringes. That same doctor had also been involved in 10 medical malpractice settlements in 10 years, which should have triggered a state investigation.

The new bill will require increased review of medical malpractice records to find patterns disturbing patterns. The bill will also increase transparency, a critical step to improved patient confidence in physicians and the medical profession. The increased access to medical records will also assist patients seeking to hold physicians accountable for their negligence and malpractice.

For more information, click here:

Swedish Covenant Hospital in Chicago recently settled a case for nearly $8 Million based on medical malpractice and negligence. The settlement comes following a physician’s failure to diagnose a nurse with meningitis even though she complained of sudden, severe joint pain, headaches and neck stiffness. Her meningitis was left undiagnosed for three days, leading to severe mental and physical disabilities. Further, she became dependent on others for nearly all aspects of self-care and mobility and suffered from severe deficits in social skills. Had the emergency room staff properly diagnosed the woman, she could have avoided severe life-long damage.

For the full article, click here:

A study of doctor response time in emergency situations published in the New England Journal of Medicine found a strong correlation between delayed time to defibrillation after in-hospital cardiac arrest and a patient’s likelihood of survival. The study lasted five years and covered nearly 15% of the large hospitals in the country. The factors the study identified as highly correlated with response time were hospital size and admitting diagnosis. Small hospitals tended to have quicker response time while patients admitted with non-cardiac diagnoses experienced a higher response time following cardiac arrest.

Surprisingly, however, the study also found a strong correlation between race and response time. In fact, African-Americans and Native Americans experienced nearly 25% greater response times when undergoing cardiac arrest. 25% is extremely significant when considering that only 30% of patients underwent defibrillation after two minutes. However, any time beyond two minutes exceeds the guidelines-based recommendations. This speaks to major problems in hospital response time where nearly 1/3 of responses exceed widely-accepted recommendations.

The significance of this delayed response time? When defibrillation was delayed, patients only had a 22% chance of survival while reasonable response time resulted in a nearly 40% survival rate. Furthermore, the study’s numbers were skewed in favor of successful hospitals as the study was voluntary. One of the study’s authors even noted that this likely resulted in responses from only generally quality care facilities.

Following this study, physicians should realize seconds do make a difference. Many of us have images of doctors on television yelling “Code Blue” and running to revive their patients. In reality, unfortunately, physicians are not always as quick to the punch. In hospitals where such delays are a recurring event, the lack of an adequate response is nothing short of negligent.

For the full study, click here:

The American Medical Association is opposing proposals to use “secret shoppers” to evaluate physicians and their relationship with patients. The AMA contends that “secret shoppers” will detract from the real work done by physicians by preventing them from seeing actual patients. The use of “secret shoppers” is simply part of the consumer health information wave but appears to mainly benefit insurers and businesses seeking to limit their health care costs. Physicians also expressed concern that the practice was grossly unethical and would violate the doctor-patient relationship.

At the same conference, the AMA President told physicians to improve patient information and reduce medical errors.

For more information, click here:

Two state medical insurers are implementing plans to create physician ranking systems that would reduce patient co-payments for visits to higher rated doctors, despite opposition from a state medical group. The medical group filed a lawsuit stating that the tiered system is unfair to physicians who arbitrarily receive low scores while providing a high level of care. The group also argues that higher costs for visiting lower rated physicians are intended to defraud patients. Worse yet, no system exists for evaluating the effectiveness of physician ranking systems. The measures appear to be largely for the benefit of insurers, not patients, and will likely have no impact on medical malpractice or the quality of care provided.

For full article, click here:

The Third District Appellate Court in Illinois ruled that a wronged woman could recover from a negligent physician even though she had previously been awarded damages in a suit against the hospital. The woman’s claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress against the physician was validated by the court, especially given the extreme negligence displayed by the physician. The woman’s infant son died during child birth after a premature delivery. Her physician was not present at the hospital at the time of the delivery and do no other doctor was present to assist in the delivery. As a result, the woman sat with her baby in a partially-delivered position for over one hour until her physician arrived and completed delivering the baby, who was deceased by this time. A jury awarded the woman damages based on negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

For the full decision, click here:

A pharmaceutical lawsuit has been filed against Baxter after an individual received tainted heparin. The tainted product given to the 38 year old man lead him to suffer from serious personal injuries, pain and suffering and emotional trauma. There is likely a medical malpractice suit to be alleged against the dialysis clinic where the individual received the tainted medication from. To see the full story click here.

A state medical board is planning to put information about medical malpractice actions against physicians on its website in an effort to better inform the public about their caregivers. The proposed plan would disclose malpractice payments for individual doctors going back only seven years. However, the medical board is receiving vehement opposition from physicians groups that claim such reporting will adversely impact their practices and will misinform the public. This opposition is misguided given that doctors would be allowed to add comments explaining the circumstances of an individual legal action. Furthermore, the website would disclose whether the medical board publicly disciplined the physician, indicating whether the physician’s malpractice was caused by negligence. Such protections would limit the unintended consequences for physicians while protecting the public by increasing transparency and access to information.

For the full article, click here:

Hepatitis C outbreaks have been linked to unsafe hospital injection practices at an Endoscopy Center. So far eighty-four individuals have contracted the disease due to the hospital’s medical malpractice. The Doctor’s negligent practices have been linked to one day when two identified physicians were on call. Medical malpractice lawsuits have already been filed and more medical malpractice suits will arise in the future as more individuals contract Hepatitis C from the hospital’s illegal conduct. As medical care is increasingly relied upon for protection and heath it is imperative that hospitals and physicians follow protocols and procedures to prevent the spread of infectious diseases, virus and bacteria. To read the full story click here.

In an op-ed piece, the head of a state medical society favors continued erosion of patients’ rights in favor of the insurance industry by unequivocally supporting medical malpractice caps. An Illinois bill, passed and signed into law in 2005, caps non-economic damages but was deemed unconstitutional by a Cook County judge.

Those most affected by this bill are innocent victims of medical malpractice and negligence and their families. Placing a cap on their recovery takes the decision out of juries’ hands, juries that are best able to determine the level of pain and suffering these individuals experience.

One of the primary goals of tort reform is to lower doctor rates for doctors. However, historically, the most successful method to for achieving this goal is insurance regulatory reform, not tort reform. When states, including Illinois, have instituted insurance regulatory reform, rates have dropped and competition has increased. To this extent, tort reform does not benefit patients but helps the insurance industry.

For further information, click here:

For the original article, click here:

Recently, a 13-year-old Illinois boy died at a Chicago hospital after being brought there with very severe signs of neglect including ulcers, one of which was seeping pus. The boy was being taken care of by his mother and three nurses for various conditions including cerebral palsy. One of the nurses, Morris Lee Brinkley, found him when she started her shift lying in his own feces and urine in the mornings, yet still failed to make a call to the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services ("DCFS"), which might have saved his life. The other nurse, Loren Brown, did not call DCFS either, though she knew the boy's mother had failed to take him to his doctor's appointments. Both nurses claim that they informed their supervisor of the child's condition, but she denies any such knowledge, further, when the nurses did not see any reaction, they should have made the call to DCFS themselves. The boy’s mother, although not a medical professional, is far from without fault however, as she had a heavy hand in his neglect. The boy’s death has been ruled a homicide, and his mother and the two nurses have been charged with felony neglect and failure to report a neglected child. The extreme level of neglect that was reached could have been prevented had there not been a nursing error: by failing to report the abuse, Brinkley and Brown, regardless of their hand in the actual neglect, made a deadly error in judgment, and their prosecution may show that medical malpractice was involved.

Read more here.

The State of Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, Division of Professional Regulation has just released a new website allows users to enter complaints about doctors and health professionals with ease. This website makes it much easier to file a state complaint in the event you have been a victim of medical malpractice or nursing errors. If you believe you are the victim of medical malpractice or nursing malpractice it is important for you to file a complaint with the Department of Professional Regulation to make sure that the state also takes its own necessary steps to investigate the problem and review the practitioner’s licensing.

Click to see the Department’s complaint site.

The Medicare program may soon stop paying for more medical care that comes as a result of hospital error. In an effort to encourage hospitals to improve their patient care and avoid medical malpractice lawsuits, hospital infections, and hospital patient injury, Medicare announced last year that it would stop funding certain procedures and treatments. Now Medicare has added more potential preventable errors to the list.

Medicare may stop funding for these common hospital errors and preventable injuries:
-Surgical site infections following certain elective procedures
-Deep vein thrombosis/Pulmonary Embolism
-Legionnaires’ disease
-Extreme blood sugar derangement
-Lung Collapse resulting from medical treatment
-Ventilator-associated pneumonia
-Delirium
-Staph infection in the bloodstream
-Disease associated with Clostridium difficile infection

Medicare’s logic is that hospitals will stop making preventable errors and preventable patient injuries if the hospital won’t get paid for the error. Hospitals used to be paid for every consult and procedure but Medicare believes that not funding for preventable error will encourage hospitals to improve patient care to protect their bottom line.

Read more on these proposed changes here.

By 2030, one of every five Americans will be over the age of 65 and nearly half of all medical care spending will go to seniors. However, the US health care market is not positioned to meet the needs of this ever expanding group. The consequences of an understaffed and under-trained geriatric health care workforce could mean a sharp increase in the number of medical malpractice lawsuits and medical injury lawsuits in the future. A recent article highlights the shortcomings of the geriatric health care system, noting that doctors who serve senior patients make less than their internist counterparts and that geriatric specialists have decreased in number by nearly 25%. To meet the new demand for geriatric health services, the US needs to add 3.5 million people to the geriatric health care workforce in the next twenty years. Without necessary staff and salary increases, seniors could face tough choices in selecting a quality health care provider and avoiding injury in the doctor’s office.

Read the full article here.