Articles Tagged with medical malpractice

If you learn that your doctor was sued for medical malpractice, should you immediately change doctors? A recent article in Consumer Reports  explains how patients can find information about their doctor and what they should do about it.

Not every doctor who was sued for medical malpractice is a bad doctor.  Consumer Reports talked to Michelle M. Mello, a Professor of Law and of Health Research and Policy  at the Stanford University School of Medicine. Mello is an expert on the medical malpractice system, medical error and patient safety. She told Consumer Reports that very often medical malpractice lawsuits “are not the best indicator of substandard care” for several reasons.  For example:

• The lawsuit may settle before a trial without the doctor admitting his error

The fear of providing lawyers with new weapons for medical malpractice lawsuits and the idea that the FDA wants to tell doctors how to practice medicine are among the many reasons why most physicians are still opposed to mandatory training for prescription of painkillers .  In 2012 a recommendation by an expert panel to implement such training was rejected by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The American Medical Association was also against the recommendation.

However since 2012 the opiate addiction problem in the US grew so big that the government is looking at all possible solutions to fight this crisis. The role of the doctor is again taking center stage as, Today and tomorrow, the FDA is convening a new panel of experts to discuss the possibility of mandatory training for physicians prescribing opiates (see briefing document for the meeting).

The Obama administration and even some drug manufacturers have now stated that they wareere in favor of such mandatory training but other organizations such as the American Medical Association Task Force to Reduce Prescription Opioid Abuse are still against it.

Too many patients requiring complex surgery are suffering the devastating consequences of medical malpractice committed by inexperienced surgeons who negligently performed the surgery.  Some medical experts believe that there should be some type of legal way to prevent patients from undergoing high risk surgeries with inexperienced surgeons in hospitals that handle a low volume of patients. In a recent article in the Washington Post, Sandra G. Boodman writes about a long-running battle known as the volume-outcome debate among medical experts. This debate was recently re-activated by the decision of John Hopkins, Dartmouth-Hitchcock and University of Michigan to require surgeons practicing specific types of high risk surgery to meet an annual threshold to be able to perform the procedure.   In her article Boodman takes the example of a pancreatic cancer patient who suffered a botched Whipple surgery after an inexperience surgeon convinced him she could do it. The patient had to undergo another surgery where a surgeon specializing in Whipple surgery successfully treated him. Boodman also refers to several studies demonstrating that in cases of complex procedures patients undergoing surgery at hospitals with a high volume of these types of surgeries had a much lesser risk to die than those in hospitals performing a low volume of the same procedures. The author also discusses the difficulty for patients to find information about how many times the surgeon performed the risky procedure and what is his or her success rate is.

Read the complete article here