“We need to hold institutions accountable…this can’t just be a hashtag. It has to be real action and the way to do that is through changes in our legal system.”
-Melissa Hoechstetter, victim of Robert Hadden, former Columbia University gynecologist
A civil lawsuit in New York was filed this week, accusing a top New York City gynecologist of sexual abuse.
The Leapfrog Group, a nonprofit group dedicated to hospital safety, has released their biannual Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grade report, showing an overall improvement in Illinois hospitals since the spring. According to Leapfrog, the survey measures hospital patient safety by the number of “errors, injuries, accidents, and infections.” Participation by hospitals is optional and this fall, 110 Illinois hospitals agreed to take part. According to the data collected, Leapfrog rated Illinois hospitals as #13 overall, an improvement from #15 this past spring.
In a time where the increasing problem of medical errors is finally being given the platform it deserves, the survey is more relevant now than ever. The Leapfrog Group, citing an often quoted 2016 Johns Hopkins study, notes that medical errors are now the third leading cause of death in the United States. Patient safety and healthcare provider accountability is essential for all hospitals and healthcare organizations. Below is our analysis of the Fall 2018 Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grade report for participating Illinois hospitals.
Illinois & Metro Chicago Hospital Results
The Center for Justice and Democracy (CJ&D), a consumer rights group out of New York Law School, has shared their list of 22 famous figures who have been harmed and even killed by medical malpractice.
Most of us are familiar with the high profile drug-related tragedies of Michael Jackson (2009) and Prince (2016) and even Judy Garland (1969) and Marilyn Monroe (1962). Some of us are familiar with the details surrounding the death of comedian Joan Rivers in 2014 during an endoscopy at a New York City clinic. But it was surprising even to us to read the details of medical neglect in cases involving other beloved celebrities. As CJ&D pointed out in their report, no one is exempt from medical negligence or malpractice, not even celebrities with all the money and resources in the world at their fingertips. The report also shared several findings that now have become well known to the public. Among them, that medical errors are the 3rd leading cause of death in this country.
Each of the 22 cases highlighted in the report has resulted in a settlement or verdict (or is pending) and in many of them, grieving loved ones or the victims themselves have said that it’s not about money, but instead about enforcing a sense of right vs. wrong in the face of injustice.
The parents of an infant girl are suing Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), alleging that hospital’s failure to follow standard infection prevention controls led to their daughter’s death. She is one of 23 infants who were sickened during a 2016 hospital outbreak of adenovirus. Recent reports have indicated that there is a second infant who died, also allegedly due to the same viral contamination.
Melanie Sanders was a premature baby receiving treatment in the neonatal intensive care unit at CHOP, the 3rd best children’s hospital in the country according to U.S. News and World Report. Melanie, along with 22 other infants in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), became ill after receiving an eye exam. Each of the infants was diagnosed with adenovirus, a group of viruses that cause respiratory symptoms and can lead to pneumonia, an infection that can prove fatal to vulnerable hospital patients, especially children, those with compromised immune systems, and the elderly.
Of the 23 infants sickened by the virus, all showed respiratory symptoms, while 5 of these infants developed pneumonia. The hospital reported in the June 2017 issue of the American Journal of Infection Control that 12 of these patients “required increased respiratory support.” In addition to the 23 infants, 3 parents and 6 hospital employees acquired the virus.
A jury voted to award $12 million to the family of Doris Newberry after her death following a failure to diagnose and treat her lung cancer. Her family, with the help of Levin & Perconti attorneys John Perconti, Michael Bonamarte and Cari Silverman, were able to prove that the defendants — including family practice doctors Dr. Iza, and Dr. Jeffrey Lindahl of Alexian Brothers Medical Group, as well as radiologist Dr. Jeffrey E. Chung, of Radiological Consultants of Woodstock — failed numerous times to appropriately diagnose and care for Newberry’s cancer. As a result, she experienced pain and suffering and disfigurement, and an untimely death, which could have been prevented had her cancer been diagnosed following a 2010 X-ray which revealed a lung abnormality.
A recent study published in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings reveals that 54% of American physicians report feeling burnt out at work. Lead study author, Stanford pediatric physician Daniel S. Tawfik, and his team found that those experiencing burnout were TWO times as likely to have made a major medical error in the last 3 months. Study authors also believe that based on this information, 1/3 of all American physicians are experiencing burnout at any given time. Researchers describe burnout as “emotional exhaustion or cynicism.”
The study questioned 6,586 physicians in active practice at an American hospital or clinic and asked them to report feelings of burnout, excessive fatigue, recent suicidal thoughts, their thoughts on patient safety on the unit in which they primarily work, as well as those who had made a major medical error. The authors found:
The largest ever medical malpractice verdict was awarded on Monday to now-17-year-old Faith DeGrand from Wyandotte, Michigan. After a two week trial and 2.5 hours of deliberation, the 8 person jury found Detroit Medical Center’s Children’s Hospital of Michigan and two doctors guilty of malpractice, awarding $135 million to the girl.
Doctor Vacationed Twice While Victim Lay Paralyzed
Faith DeGrand was 10 years old when she went to Children’s Hospital of Michigan for a relatively routine pediatric scoliosis surgery. Following protocol for the surgery, a rod and screws were placed in her back to help straighten her spine. Her surgeon inappropriately placed the surgical hardware, causing compression on the young girl’s spine. Immediately following the surgery, Faith experienced severe pain, paralysis of her arms and legs, and lost all bowel and bladder control. She was unable to walk or use the bathroom, bound to a wheelchair and forced to use a catheter. Realizing the placement of the surgical devices was causing Faith’s injuries, another surgeon removed them. However, the damage was already done. Faith spent the next year in a wheelchair and will spend the rest of her life using a catheter and unable to have full control of her arms and legs, a condition known as a quadriparesis.
When we enter the hospital for treatment we trust that the doctors and other medical staff will provide us with the best possible care and will diagnose and treat our condition. That was not the situation in a recent case. A woman visited the hospital with complaints of a stiff neck, pain, a rash, and a low-grade fever. The attending physician tried to perform a test to ensure that the woman was not suffering from meningitis. However, the doctor tried more than 20 times to insert the test needle and as a result caused serious nerve damage. The woman filed a lawsuit in Cook County against Centegra Hospital-McHenry and the doctor who treated her.
Meningitis Testing
Continue reading ›
Up until recently, one did not need to be a legal expert handling hospital related cases to know the difference between inpatient care and outpatient care. As traditionally understood, if you are receiving outpatient care you get to go home that day, and if you are receiving inpatient care, you have to stay in the hospital overnight. It has been a simple distinction. But hospitals are now blurring that distinction in a way that hurts patients, especially the elderly who after a life of hard work rely on Medicare to cover their medical expenses.
How Observation Status Hurts Patients
USA Today reported on this ongoing crisis earlier this month. It explains that under recent changes in the law, doctors have to certify that a patient has a serious enough condition to need at least two overnight stays for Medicare to cover an inpatient admission. However, patients are remaining in outpatient “observation” status for several nights in regular hospital rooms and not being admitted as inpatient-status patients. This becomes extremely costly to consumers because, while inpatient care under Medicare has a deductible, after that deductible is met the care is usually fully covered.
It is no secret that litigating a medical malpractice claim can be stressful and difficult. The system is complicated, and resolving a case is not always quick. Our system of resolving medical malpractice claims is fraught with unnecessary impediments and flaws, such as frivolous lawsuits, lengthy settlement processes, and legal technicalities.
One such problem is that of doctor uncertainty. Accidents are called accidents because they are unexpected and unintended, and they can happen even in the care of well-intentioned, experienced doctors who have acted as they should. Still, they may be hit with lawsuits that gum up the courts, thus slowing the process for meritorious claims. To attack this problem, some experts propose what are called “safe harbor” laws. These are laws that protect doctors from malpractice suits in cases where they have followed accepted clinical guidelines. Essentially, doctors are provided with checklists that, if followed, will prevent their liability for malpractice claims. However, where they are not followed, the doctors will open themselves up to liability.
Despite being intended to protect doctors, a new study has found that safe harbor laws are likely more beneficial to patients than doctors. The researchers examined malpractice cases from Oregon between 2002 and 2009 to see whether they would have come out differently had Oregon had safe harbor rules in place during the period. The study found that safe harbor rules would have changed the outcome of the case in favor of the defendant physician in only 1 percent of the 266 claims it examined, so it seems that safe harbor laws do not help doctors very much.
Illinois Medical Malpractice Blog