We trust in our healthcare because we must. If medical malpractice happens and a loved one is seriously injured or killed, we expect hospitals and our healthcare providers to admit fault and take accountability for what happened. Sadly, patients cannot always count on hospitals and healthcare providers to do the right thing.
Radiology malpractice is more common than many people realize. Over 80 million radiology examinations are performed in the United States every year, including Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Computed Tomography (CT or CAT scan), Positron Emission Tomography (PET scan), and x-ray studies also known as plain radiographs. Given the immense volume of imaging studies and high expectations on radiologists to interpret those studies with speed and accuracy, it’s no surprise radiology is the eighth most common medical specialty to be implicated in a medical malpractice claim. Â
There are numerous VA Healthcare Systems and Hospitals available to veterans in Pennsylvania including the VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System – made up of the Pittsburgh VA Medical Center-University Drive in Oakland and the H. John Heinz III Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Aspinwall. While the VA Health System provides a great service to our veterans, we have seen many instances where the medical care was substandard and led to avoidable injuries and death.
On March 9, 2020, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) issued a final rule that will amend the Code of Federal Regulations in ways that greatly enhance an individual’s ability to access their electronic health records through modern tools, like apps and the internet. Titled the 21st Century Cures Act: Interoperability, Information Blocking, and the ONC Health IT Certification Program, the final rule will become effective sixty-days after the date it is published in the Federal Register.
In the hectic environment of the emergency department, rapid diagnosis and emergent management of life-threatening conditions must occur. In the patient with acute chest pain and an EKG concerning for an ST segment elevation myocardial infarction STEMI, the diagnosis and treatment is generally straightforward. National guidelines recommend emergent reperfusion with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or fibrinolytic therapy. Unfortunately, the potential for patient harm is high when acute aortic dissection causes an acute coronary syndrome and produces ischemic EKG changes.
Many patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) lack overt chest pain or pressure and present to the emergency room with “atypical” signs and symptoms. As a result, the emergency provider may fail to consider the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome, leading to a greater risk of serious injury or patient death. This article examines atypical symptoms of ACS in an effort to reduce instances of medical negligence or malpractice.
Attorneys Jerry Meyers and Brendan Lupetin were recently interviewed as part of a report for ABC27.com related to autopsies and medical negligence after a 53-year old woman died following a 30+ day stay in a Pennsylvania hospital. Her family has questions about the care that she received, and whether or not negligence in that care led to her death. They requested an autopsy, and expressed concern about the autopsy being performed by the same hospital that provided her care being a conflict of interest.
Bi-partisan legislation has been introduced in the House and Senate that would partially repeal the Feres Doctrine and allow active duty military to sue under the FTCA when they are injured or killed from medical malpractice. This bill passed Congress on 12/17/2019 and is expected to be signed into law by the President. If this bill becomes law, for the first time in almost 70 years active duty military would be allowed to seek redress from the Department of Defense (DOD) when they are injured and killed due to medically malpractice in military hospitals.
On October 31, 2019, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court handed down its opinion in Yanakos v. UPMC and declared Pennsylvania’s statute of repose unconstitutional. Before the Court, UPMC argued the statute of response complied with Article I, Section 11 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. The Court found UPMC proved the statute of repose was related to the important government’s interest of controlling the rising costs associated with medical insurance and medical care. However, UPMC failed to produce evidence of how the statute of repose actually achieved this government interest.
There are various types of medical malpractice cases ranging from surgery on the wrong body part, to misdiagnosis of a disease. If a case of medical malpractice is proven to have caused harm to the patient, the patient is entitled to be compensated the amount of money damages that fairly and adequately compensates the them for all the physical injuries and financial damages he or she has sustained.
The bare minimum required to prove a medical malpractice claim requires a patient to establish: 1. The healthcare provider undertook and had a duty to care for the patient; 2. The healthcare provider violated that duty i.e. deviated from the standard of care and was negligence; 3. The healthcare provider’s negligence was an actual cause of harm to the patient; and 4. Harm in the form of injury or death.
Pennsylvania medical malpractice and wrongful death lawsuits often hinge on the results of an autopsy. This is because the exact cause of death is the starting point for your medical malpractice lawyer to figure out what mistakes were made that led to the outcome. Successful prosecution of a medical malpractice wrongful death lawsuit becomes nearly impossible if the cause of the patient’s death is unclear or unknown.
