August 2010 Archives

The family of a Nevada woman who died due to a medical misdiagnosis is preparing to challenge the state's $350,000 cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice lawsuits. A wrongful death lawsuit was filed by the family of Adeline Villegas, who died in August 2007 of a ruptured ulcer and peritonitis after being misdiagnosed by Dr. Mahmud Sheikh as pancreatitis.

Defense attorneys argued that the maximum amount that Villegas' husband and six children could collect would be $350,000. The plaintiffs are challenging that interpretation, claiming that the cap should apply to each individual claimant, which would raise the amount awarded for pain and suffering to $5.6 million.

More than half the states in the nation currently have caps (the amount varies from state to state), but they increasingly have been challenged by plaintiffs with medical malpractice lawsuits. In just the past year, the State Supreme Courts in Illinois and Georgia have thrown out their states' damage caps. The rulings said the imposition of caps by the state legislatures violated the plaintiffs' rights to a trial by jury.

The current Nevada malpractice caps were approved by the state's voters in 2004 after intense campaigning by physicians throughout the state.

If you have a malpractice case, you should seek the services of an attorney who understands the medical field. Dr. Bruce G. Fagel understands law and medicine as he is a practicing attorney who is also a licensed physician. For a free case evaluation, call him at 800/541-9376 or go to his website at www.fagellaw.com.

A study released earlier this month estimates that measurable medical errors cost the U.S. economy $19.5 billion in 2008. Commissioned by the Society of Actuaries, the report used claims data to provide an actuarially sound measurement of costs for avoidable medical injuries. Of the approximately $80 billion in costs associated with medical injuries, approximately one-fourth of that total was the result of avoidable medical errors. Of the $19.5 billion spent, $17 billion was the result of providing inpatient, outpatient and prescription drug services to individuals affected by the medical errors.

Medical errors are a significant source of lost healthcare funds every year. For example, the study found that $1.1 billion was from lost productivity due to disability claims, and $1.4 billion was lost from increased death rates among individuals who experienced medical errors.

Among the study's interesting statistics: the average total cost per error was $13,000; in an inpatient setting, 7% of admissions are estimated to result in some type of medical injury; and medical errors resulted in more than 2,500 avoidable deaths and more than 10 million excess days missed from work. More than half of the total error costs were the result of five common errors: pressure ulcers; postoperative infections; mechanical complications of devices, implants or grafts; postlaminectomy syndrome; and hemorrhages.

Medical errors are costly to patients emotionally and economically. If a doctor or a medical facility has committed malpractice they should be held liable. That's when you need the services of an attorney who knows the medical system. Dr. Bruce G. Fagel is an attorney who is also a licensed doctor. Call him at 800/541-9376, or visit him online at www.fagellaw.com, for a free case evaluation.

The California Supreme Court ruled earlier this week that a patient's heirs are bound to arbitration agreements in all medical malpractice claims, even if the heirs never signed the agreement. This published opinion reverses earlier decisions of the trial and appellate courts. The higher court ruled that the individual claims of heirs in a wrongful death or other medical malpractice suits are swept up in the arbitration agreement. The issues is significant because most of the state's healthcare management organizations include arbitration clauses in their members' plans.

In its opinion, the court cited the 1975 Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act, or MICRA, noting the intent of the act was to rein in the costs associated with medical malpractice insurance. The law caps the non-economic damages that plaintiffs can recover at $250,000 and encourages parties to seek arbitration as a cost-saving measure.

This week's opinion stemmed from a wrongful death suit brought by the children of Rafael Ruiz, who died in 2006 after undergoing surgery for a fractured hip. His wife and four children filed a suit against his surgeon, Anatol Podolsky. Though Ruiz was the only one to sign the arbitration agreement, his family members' claims were swept up by that agreement.

If you are in need of a medical malpractice attorney, you should contact Dr. Bruce G. Fagel, an attorney who is also a licensed doctor. Dr. Fagel's results speak for themselves. For a free consultation, call 800/541-9376 or visit him online at www.medicalmalpracticedoctorlawyer.com.

According to a new study by the Physician Insurers Association of America, heart attack (acute myocardial infarction) is the third-most expensive medical condition leading to claims against physicians, after those involving brain-damaged infants and breast cancer. The study evaluated medical malpractice information on paid claims related to heart attacks with an accident date since January 1985.

Family physicians were the target of the highest number of claims (160 of 423 defendants). Internal medicine physicians, the group with the second highest number of claims filed against it, had the highest average indemnity payment for any specialty group at $252,100.

In the majority of the cases in which an EKG was performed, but the provider failed to make the diagnosis, the EKG was either misinterpreted of the results were not conveyed to the provider in a timely fashion. The treatment error alleged most frequently was a delay in hospitalization, which occurred 46% of the time. Delay in performing a follow-up procedure was the second-most common treatment error. Other errors included not seeking a consultation or referral, prematurely discharging a patient from the emergency room, or treating for another diagnosis.

If you or a loved one is victimized by a doctor's malpractice, call The Law Offices of Dr. Bruce G. Fagel and Associates, which only handles medical malpractice cases. Call 800/541-9376 or visit online at www.fagellaw.com.

According to a report released earlier this month by the Oregon Patient Safety Commission, at least 32 patients died as a result of preventable errors in Oregon hospitals last year. The commission, which was created by the Oregon legislature in 2003, is a collaborative effort between the state and the healthcare industry to reduce serious errors. All but two of Oregon's 58 hospitals are participating in the voluntary program.

For 2009, hospitals reported 136 incidents. Half resulted in serious injury or death. In nine cases, a surgical team operated on the wrong body part or on the wrong patient. Surgeons accidentally left objects in patients 21 times--despite the commission setting a target of eliminating this type of error. Reports of objects accidentally left in surgical patients have declined from a high of 50 in 2007. However, the number has remained at around 40 incidents a year since 2002, leading the commission to conclude that hospitals have not made meaningful progress in reducing such errors.

Another area of stalled progress is notifying affected patients in writing about every serious adverse event. Doing so is a requirement of participating in the patient safety program. Last year, hospitals provided written notification in about half of the 80 cases in which it was required.

The statistics for preventable errors in hospitals and by doctors--and not just in Oregon--is alarming. If you are victimized by a preventable error, you need the services of an attorney who specializes in medical malpractice. At The Law Offices of Dr. Bruce G. Fagel and Associates, medical malpractice cases are all we handle. Call 800/541-9376, or visit us online at www.medicalmalpracticedoctorlawyer.com, for a free consultation.

A medical malpractice lawsuit has been filed against St. Joseph's Hospital of St. Paul (Minnesota) for allegedly allowing a patient undergoing surgery to fall off of the operating table, which eventually led to his death. Max DeVries, 61, rolled off the operating table on May 8, 2009, while undergoing a lumbar drain following a stroke a few months prior. Part of his skull had been removed, and he hit the exposed part of his brain on the floor. The lawsuit, filed by his son Shawn, says the hospital failed to provide adequate care for his father.

DeVries was about 5'5" tall and weighed about 300 pounds. The lawsuit claims that the table's velcro straps failed to hold DeVries down. According to the claim, the hospital did not have the appropriate operating table or restraints to handle DeVries, who the lawsuit describes as being well within the weight parameters of the hospital.

The hospital performed additional surgeries on DeVries to correct the damage caused by the fall, but DeVries never recovered from the incident and died of a massive stroke in April.

When deaths are preventable, and malpractice is a contributing factor, there is legal recourse. If you or someone you love has a medical malpractice case, call The Law Offices of Dr. Bruce G. Fagel and Associates. We have a track record of success because of our knowledge and expertise. For a free case evaluation, call 800/541-9376 or log on at www.fagellaw.com.

Mission Hospital in Mission Viejo, Calif., faces a medical malpractice lawsuit in connection with the accidental administration of morphine to a newborn baby. The mistake occurred last year and prompted the California Department of Health (CDPH) to fine the hospital $50,000. Reports are that Jessica Blischke prematurely gave birth to triplets via cesarean section on April 4, 2009. When Blischke was subsequently prescribed morphine to ease her postpartum pains, mother and one of her daughter's IVs were accidentally switched.

Daughter Taylee was given four milligrams of morphine that was intended for her mother. Within moments, the child's heartbeat allegedly dropped to unsafe levels, forcing doctors to intubate her so she could breathe normally. The mix-up remained unnoticed even after tests revealed the presence of opiates in the newborn's system. The medical error was only brought to light after additional tests were performed on Taylee and her two sisters. Given that the other two infants tested negative for opiates, Mission Hospital personnel eventually recognized the medication mix-up.

After Mission Hospital was fined by the CDPH, it submitted a corrective plan with the state. To prevent future similar errors, the hospital said medications would no longer be administered in the neonatal intensive care unit. Although Taylee was "discharged in a healthy condition," mediation is set to begin at the end of the month.

When mistakes are made with newborns, it could have life-long consequences, both physically and financially. That's when you need legal representation by someone who understands the legal and medical professions. Dr. Bruce G. Fagel is a licensed attorney and physician. Call him at 800/541-9376 for a free consultation. Or you can visit him online at www.birthinjurydoctorlawyer.com.

According to a report released last week, the amount of money Los Angeles County paid to settle medical malpractice lawsuits increased by 50% in two years. The county paid $8 million to settle cases in 2005 and $12 million in 2007, according to the study from the Abaris Group, a healthcare consulting firm.

The report found the number of medical malpractice cases filed against county hospitals and clinics dropped from 354 in 2002 to 107 last year. The authors say this drop may relate to patient safety efforts in the healthcare industry in general and at the Department of Health Services (DHS).

According to the authors, they found evidence that DHS is making progress in responding more quickly to patient safety problems, but the day-to-day demands to keep patients safe have increased and patient safety procedures have become cumbersome.

The 60-page report was commissioned by the L.A. County Board of Supervisors to review the health department's efforts to prevent medical malpractice and improve patient safety. Additionally, the authors noted that there were still outstanding claims for 2008 and 2009, so it was not possible to include the amount of settlements in those years.

If you are in Los Angeles, have been victimized by medical malpractice, and seek local representation, you should call The Law Offices of Dr. Bruce G. Fagel and Associates. As a practicing attorney and a licensed physician, Dr. Fagel is one of the most successful attorneys in the nation. Call 800/541-9376 for a free consultation, or visit online at www.lamedicalmalpracticelawfirm.com.

This week I have chronicled in depth various aspects of the mediation of medical malpractice cases. Today, I conclude with two important components.

Mediation process

The defense will always want to respond to a specific dollar demand by the plaintiff before making an offer at mediation. Therefore, the plaintiff should be prepared to make a specific demand either at the start of the mediation, or in the brief sent before the mediation. The amount of the demand will be based on the trial value of the case and on the defendant's available insurance coverage. Most physicians in California have a $1 million limit of liability insurance, but if a physician is employed by a medical group, the group may have additional liability insurance coverage for the case. It is not necessary to know the full amount of the available insurance coverage before starting the process to get to mediation, but it is essential to know the full extent of available insurance coverage by the time the mediation starts. Sometimes, it will take the mediation process to fully uncover the available insurance coverage directly from the insurance claims representative who attends the mediation. Although an insurance company will never settle a case for more than the available insurance coverage, they will sometimes hide the availability of excess coverage. It is the mediator's responsibility to uncover whether such excess or additional insurance is available.

Since many medical malpractice cases involve multiple defendants, it is important that all liable defendants attend the mediation, since it is the only time when the defendants will have an opportunity and reason to decide their relative liability. Often, such relative liability must be determined between the defendants before any substantive discussions can occur on the amount of an offer.

When to settle and for how much

In most medical malpractice cases, a mediation is the best opportunity to settle a case for several reasons, First, it is often the only time and place when multiple defendants can actually discuss their relative liability. Second, it provides an opportunity to obtain an independent evaluation of the value of the case from the mediator, which can have an effect on both the plaintiff and the defense. Third, it is the opportunity for the plaintiff attorney to fully discuss all aspects of the case with the plaintiff, who should be provided a copy of the brief to fully understand both the facts of the case and the liability position. While many cases can and should be settled at a single mediation session, sometimes each side needs to reevaluate their position, especially when there are multiple defendants and more authority is needed to settle. If the case does not settle at the first mediation, it is imperative for the plaintiff's attorney to identify all of the issues that must be resolved before returning to the second session. An experienced mediator can be very helpful in focusing on such issues.

Because of California's MICRA limitation on non-economic damages, the value of any medical malpractice case can be reasonably determined in advance of the mediation. Assuming adequate liability insurance coverage, a mediation offers the opportunity to mathematically determine the value of a case for settlement. While a plaintiff attorney may feel that a jury will award a substantial amount at trial, based on the economic damages that can be placed before them--and any malpractice defendant is concerned that a jury may do exactly that--it is the unpredictability of any jury trial that makes mediation appropriate for medical malpractice cases. While cases with good facts and clear causation should settle for an amount closer to the plaintiff's determination of damages, even cases with defensible causation or conflicting evidence on the standard of care can be settled if both sides recognize that the plaintiff's damages will result in some value. This removes the risk to the defense of a large verdict, while guaranteeing the plaintiff some recovery that can be viewed as reasonable under the specific facts and circumstances of the case.

That concludes this series on the mediation of malpractice cases. If you have any questions about this, or if you think you have a medical malpractice case, call our offices for a free consultation. Call us at 800/541-9376, and we're always available online at www.fagellaw.com.

In this third part of this series on mediations, I detail when and how to schedule a mediation, how to select a mediator, and finish with the importance of the mediation brief.

When and how to schedule a mediation

Although the defense attorney will often request a complete evaluation of a case--including liability and damages--before agreeing to proceed to a deposition, it is only necessary for the defense to understand the liability potential of the case before agreeing to schedule a meditation. After a meditation date is set, which is usually at least 60-90 days out, the damages aspect of the case can be developed, including scheduling an IME and/or obtaining economic data on lost wages and future medical expenses. In any case that involves significant economic damages, a mediation should be scheduled far enough out to allow for both sides to obtain expert evaluations on damages, including a life care plan and economic reports. Also, the plaintiff attorney should provide economic reports to the defense at least 30 days before the mediation so that the insurance carrier will have sufficient time to obtain authority for settlement. If a trial date has been assigned, which then sets a CCP Sec. 2034 designation of experts, it is sometimes helpful to schedule a mediation just after the date for the designation of experts. Both sides will know the identity of the experts prior to taking the depositions, which can reduce the costs of going through expert depositions.

Selection of a mediator

The best mediator is usually a former plaintiff attorney who has experience with medical malpractice cases, since they often have a better understanding about the value of a case--both in terms of damages and liability. While there are many retired judges who are excellent mediators for many types of cases and who may have a good understanding about the mediation process, their trial experience with medical malpractice cases usually involves cases with little or no merit. Since a mediation involves more than just facilitating the positions of the opposing parties, having a mediator who can critique the position of each party by providing an independent evaluation about the strengths and weaknesses of each side will be beneficial to both sides. Over the years most defense attorneys and insurance claims representatives have recognized the need to have an experienced attorney as mediator rather than just someone with good mediator skills. As a result, these individuals are usually booked well in advance, which is why it takes 60-90 days or more to get a date for mediation. However, this allows enough time to properly prepare for a meaningful mediation. That's better--for all involved--than going to the first available person.

Mediation brief

A well-prepared mediation brief is most helpful for an experienced mediator in evaluating a case. It should contain a narrative of the essential facts of the case and a separate analysis of the liability and causation issues, including references to specific expert opinions. The damages section should include all reports necessary to document the damages including any relevant medical reports on the plaintiff, a life care plan, and economic report. This will allow the mediator to understand the plaintiff's position and the relation of the actual damages to the plaintiff's demand. In many mediations, the defense will only submit a confidential brief to the mediator, either because one defendant does not want the plaintiff to know its position relative to another defendant, or because a defendant does not want the plaintiff to know about some problem that the defense has in the case. On occasion, the defense will submit a confidential brief because they do not want to admit too much to the plaintiff and would rather just settle the case. Therefore, the only constant for a successful mediation is a well-written and thorough brief by the plaintiff.

Tomorrow I will conclude this series with the mediation process itself, and then what everyone wants to know--when to settle and for what amount.

Sometimes it is difficult to put a dollar value on a medical malpractice case, or even if you have a good case. I offer a free evaluation as to the merits of your case. Simply contact The Law Offices of Dr. Bruce G. Fagel and Associates by calling 800/541-9376 or visiting us online at www.fagellaw.com.

Yesterday I wrote about how to get the defense interested in mediation. Today's subject is much more complex.

What needs to be done before going to mediation

The defense will usually require the plaintiff's deposition before going to a mediation, even if the defense wants a mediation before preparing their client for a deposition. While the defense attorney and insurance claims representative may be able to evaluate the defense position on liability without the deposition of the defendant doctor or nurse, it makes little sense to expect a proper evaluation of the case without the plaintiff's deposition. A plaintiff who makes a good witness is in a stronger position at mediation, while a plaintiff who makes a poor witness will be in a better position to understand the risks of trial, which may make it easier for the plaintiff to accept resolution of the case at mediation. While an insurance claims representative will always think that they understand the risks of a trial, it is equally important that a plaintiff understand what is involved with presenting the case to a jury, and a deposition is often the best way of allowing a plaintiff to understand the process.

The deposition of the defendant physician and/or nurses should always be taken before going to mediation, unless the defense agrees in advance to not contest or discuss liability at the mediation. This will avoid the problem of the defense wanting a deduction in the damages based on liability issues that they believe would increase the risks of the plaintiff prevailing on liability at trial. If the defense wants to discuss liability at the mediation, then the plaintiff must take the deposition of any defendant doctor and/or nurse who is expected to contribute to a settlement. Also, a deposition of the defendant doctor may be necessary to get the doctor to consent to settlement, which is an essential prerequisite to any mediation.

The deposition of experts is usually not required before proceeding to a mediation. If the facts are sufficient to show liability, the defense usually assumes that the plaintiff will have experts to testify on the plaintiff's theory of liability. Also, any defendant will know what their liability expert has to say before agreeing to a mediation. However, a plaintiff should be prepared to at least identify their liability experts prior to a mediation, and even offer their deposition so that all liability issues will be clear at the mediation. If the defense agrees that they want to take the plaintiff's experts before mediation, then plaintiff should obtain a stipulation for an early designation of experts before offering plaintiff's experts for deposition.

In any case where the plaintiff has significant damages and/or any type of permanent disability, an independent medical examination (IME) is required before the defense will ever be in position to accurately evaluate the plaintiff's damages. The defense may be reluctant to notice an IME if the mediation is far enough before the trial date because of their fear that they may not be able to conduct a second IME before trial without a court order. Since any court would grant such a motion, is it better to inform the defense in advance of a mediation that if the case does not settle, the plaintiff would agree to a second IME? That agreement would eliminate that potential barrier to a mediation being scheduled before a trial date has been set.

This series will continue tomorrow, with information on scheduling a mediation as well as how to select a mediator. In the meantime, if you are seeking a medical malpractice attorney, consider The Law Offices of Dr. Bruce G. Fagel and Associates. We have a track record of success that is unparalleled. Call 800/541-9376, or visit online at www.fagellaw.com, for a free consultation.

There are many intricacies when it comes to the mediation of a medical malpractice lawsuit. Over the course of the next few days I will be blogging about several of them. It's not rocket science, but as you will see the combination of knowledge, anticipation and preparedness goes a long way toward the successful resolution of a dispute.

Most judges readily admit that they have a negative view of most medical malpractice cases that proceed to trial. They believe that any case with merit should have been settled prior to trial. This attitude is borne out by the statistic that most medical malpractice cases result in defense verdicts at trial. Since the healthcare system can do little to reduce the incidence of medical errors, and since the number of meritorious medical malpractice cases will likely increase in the future, once a medical malpractice case enters the civil justice system, it is imperative that any plaintiff attorney understand how to best use the mediation process to get a maximum reasonable recovery for their client.

Obviously, the most important step in handling any medical malpractice case is the initial evaluation. That is because with the vast majority of cases, taking a case without merit will make it difficult--if not impossible--to ever get the case to a mediation. However, assuming that a case with the appropriate facts that support a finding of both negligence and medical causation enters the system, mediation can be the most cost-effective way of resolving the case for both the plaintiff and the defendant. The recommendations today and in the days that follow assume that the facts of the case are sufficient to not only survive a summary judgment motion, but to interest the defendants' insurance claims representative in resolving the case before trial.

How to get the defense interested in mediation

Since most defense attorneys have little incentive to resolve a case before they can do sufficient discovery, and bill for the hours spent--unless the defendant or their insurance carrier instructs the defense attorney to propose an early mediation--it is up to the plaintiff's attorney to get the case into mediation. The best way to do this is by providing the defense attorney, and the insurance claims representative, sufficient factual information about the plaintiff's theory of the case and the supportive medical basis for causation. With rare exceptions, the best time to approach the defense about mediation is after the plaintiff's deposition--particularly if the plaintiff makes a good witness. Another good time is after the defendant's deposition, with a line of questioning that makes the plaintiff's theory of liability and causation very clear. On rare occasions, setting the depositions of the defendants will evoke a response that the defense would like to go to mediation before exposing their client to a deposition.

In tomorrow's blog, I will detail what needs to be done before going to mediation.

If you need the services of a medical malpractice attorney, contact Dr. Bruce G. Fagel. As an attorney and a licensed physician, he is very knowledgeable about the medical and legal fields. Call him at 800/541-9376, or visit his website at www.fagellaw.com.  

A woman who underwent a double mastectomy only to find out she never had breast cancer will receive a $198,000 settlement from Los Angeles County. The settlement with Ana Jimenez-Salgado was approved this week by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.

Jimenez-Salgado underwent a double mastectomy at L.A. County-USC Medical Center after two outside pathologists determined her August 2007 biopsy detected cancer. After the surgery, breast tissue was examined by the hospital's pathologists who concluded Jimenez-Salgado didn't have cancer. They determined she had a benign condition with features similar to cancer cells. She later underwent reconstructive surgery.

Jiminez-Salgado filed a medical malpractice lawsuit, claiming the hospital was negligent in relying on the interpretation of the outside pathologists. She also alleged the breast reconstruction surgery was negligently performed. The county acknowledged it failed to review the biopsy specimens, resulting in the unnecessary mastectomy. As part of the settlement, county supervisors also agreed to pay $24,756 of Jiminez-Salgado's medical bills not covered by Medi-Cal.

Unfortunately, medical errors are too prevalent today. It is one of the most common forms of medical malpractice. If you have been victimized by a hospital or a healthcare provider, you should seek an attorney who knows and understands healthcare. Dr. Bruce G. Fagel is an attorney who is also a licensed physician. Call him at 800/541-9376, or visit him online at www.fagellaw.com., for a free consultation.

Last week, six Louisiana abortion clinics filed a federal lawsuit challenging a state abortion law that prevents doctors who perform elective abortions from obtaining medical malpractice insurance. The law was overwhelmingly approved by the state legislature last session, marking the latest development in a two-decade "annual ritual" whereby lawmakers typically pass at least one law imposing abortion restrictions and abortion-rights supporters challenging it in court.

The suit contends the law treats abortion providers differently from other health professionals and denies them equal legal protection. According to the suit, the law is intended to deter doctors from performing abortions, which would impose "a substantial obstacle in the path of women seeking abortions."

If you need representation for a medical malpractice case, call The Law Offices of Dr. Bruce Fagel and Associates. With nearly three decades of experience, the firm is one of the most successful in the nation. For more information, call 800/541-9376 or visit us online at www.fagellaw.com.

Earlier this week the Los Angeles Times reported that a Northern California nursing home was fined $100,000 after its staff allegedly failed to prevent a patient from falling twice and suffering a fatal head injury for which he was not treated.

An 85-year-old patient, who had a heart condition and diabetes, was supposed to be supervised when walking with his walker. However, a state investigator found that staff members of Pilgrim Haven Health Facility in Los Altos failed to install an electronic fall monitor--as ordered by the patient's doctor--and also failed to ensure that the patient's walker was within reach.

Doctors used a CT scan to determine that the cause of death was bleeding in the brain and a fall with head trauma.

The nursing home is appealing the state citation.

If you have reason to sue a nursing home for abuse or neglect, The Law Offices of Bruce G. Fagel and Associates have a lot of experience and success in these types of cases. Visit www.nursinghomenegligencedoctorlawyer.com, or call for a free consultation at 800/541-9376.

In an attempt to reduce wrongful patient death and disability resulting from errors in the administration of injectable medications in hospitals and other healthcare facilities, the U.S. Pharmacopeial Convention (USP) is advancing new labeling requirements that will standardize the information permitted on the highly visible area of these vials to only cautionary statements intended to prevent life-threatening situations. When no cautionary statement is necessary, this area will be required to remain blank, precluding company logos and other information being printed in these locations.

USP CEO Dr. Roger Williams said that settings in which injectable products are often administered--including emergency rooms and intensive care units--can be busy and increases the chances of misadministration of a product. Reports from several organizations indicate that labeling of injectable products may be linked to medication errors in the administration of these products. Patient safety data from U.S. hospitals indicate that the most severe medication errors are related to human performance deficits, with environmental distractions as a major contributing factor.

The USP is the official standards-setting body for medicines and their ingredients in the nation. Its standards are enforceable by the Food and Drug Administration.

Medication errors is one of the most common forms of medical malpractice. If you need an attorney who only handles medical malpractice cases, you should seek the services of Dr. Bruce G. Fagel, an attorney who is also a licensed doctor. For a free case evaluation, call him at 800/541-9376 or contact him through his website at www.fagellaw.com.

A new state mandate in Connecticut, which went into effect July 1, 2010, requiring mediation in medical malpractice cases, has been met with mixed reviews--from both plaintiff and defense lawyers. The provision calls for the presiding judge in the judicial district where a medical malpractice case is filed to refer the matter to a 120-day period of mediation or to another form of alternative dispute resolution before the close of the pleadings. If the first month is any indication, the new law may take smaller cases off the litigation track, but won't resolve some of the bigger cases that require the opinions of experts and extensive discovery.

The first mediation session is to be conducted by the presiding judge within 20 business days after the initial referral. If this mandatory session does not produce an agreement, the parties may agree to keep trying, and the statute next calls for the judge to refer the case for mediation. The judge makes the referral to a Connecticut lawyer with at least five years of membership in the state bar. Plaintiffs and defense parties split mediation costs. If that fails, the case is back on the litigation track, with lawyers conducting discovery, possibly holding settlement negotiations and otherwise preparing for an eventual trial.

Even before the law went into effect, parties could agree to voluntary mediation, and the only new step is the one-day session before the judge, which is unlikely to produce resolution in difficult cases.

If you have a medical malpractice case, and seek an attorney with a track record of success, you should seek the services of Dr. Bruce G. Fagel. As a practicing attorney with a medical degree, he knows the legal and medical professions very well. Call him at 800/541-9376 for a free consultation, or visit his website at www.medicalmalpracticedoctorlawyer.com.

A new study on treating cerebral palsy with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is garnering attention in the United States and India. The largest sample of children studied to assess neuro-developmental improvements focuses on a combination of standard rehabilitation therapies, such as occupational, physical, speech and HBOT, which raises the oxygen molecule content in the body through oxygen-carrying blood cells and all body fluids. A person enters a treatment chamber, and the air pressure is compressed with more molecules of air and oxygen. HBOT has received media attention because athletes use it to train and recover from injuries, diabetics use it to save limbs, it kills resistant bacteria, and there have been new applications in neurology brain injuries, traumas and disorders.

This new study out of India compares the use of various hyperbaric pressures with the use of air alone or oxygen enrichment in the treatment of children with CP. The study shows that low-pressure ambient air hyperbaric therapy is as or more effective than high-pressure 100% oxygen in the treatment of CP. These results refute previous assumptions in the hyperbaric industry that 100% oxygen under higher pressure is a superior treatment. In the areas of cognitive development, the milder therapy does not trigger the narrowing of the blood vessels in the brain in the way that other therapies do, thus allowing additional oxygen to pass through tissue unrestricted.

Additionally, this study could have far-reaching implications for other neurological conditions. Facing the skyrocketing costs of treating traumatic brain injury for recovering veterans, stroke and autism, this study brings hope to those struggling to afford this therapy.

Many times when a child has cerebral palsy it is the result of medical malpractice. If you need an attorney for this type of malpractice, contact Dr. Bruce G. Fagel at 800/541-9376 or online at www.brucefagellaw.com.

A California state judge has tossed bids to dismiss medical malpractice charges, as well as fraud and conspiracy charges, against St. Jude Medical Inc. and two individuals, allowing the case against the medical device manufacturer to proceed. Attorneys for Albert Israel filed a suit alleging his longtime physician Dr. Michael Burnam placed his financial interests over the health of the patient by prescribing Israel with an unnecessary defibrillator.

Israel's attorneys contend that the February 2008 surgery nearly killed Israel when the lead for the device pierced his heart. Minneapolis-based St. Jude disclosed in May that the U.S. Justice Department had requested documents from the company as part of a civil investigation of its implantable defibrillator business. At the time, St. Jude officials stated they believed its major competitors were served with similar demands and said they were cooperating with the government investigation.

Without entering a plea, the company, in June, paid $3.7 million to settle a federal lawsuit accusing it and two hospitals in Cleveland and Cincinnati, respectively, of participating in a kickback scheme alleging St. Jude paid illegal rebates to healthcare providers in exchange for using its cardiac implants. The case developed from allegations by a former regional sales manager who claimed he was fired by the company after objecting to the purported scheme.

If you have been victimized by medical malpractice, consider the services of Dr. Bruce G. Fagel. An attorney who is also a licensed physician, Dr. Fagel only handles medical malpractice cases. For a free consultation, call him at 800/541-9376 or log on at www.medicalmalpracticedoctorlawyer.com.

The American Medical Association (AMA) has released a report that, among those surveyed by the AMA, there was an average of 95 medical malpractice claims filed for every 100 physicians--almost one per physician. Included in the report is information on malpractice claim impact by age, gender and practice patterns.

Report highlights include: before reaching the age of 40, more than half of the Ob/Gyns have already been sued; nine in 10 general surgeons 55 and over have been sued; six in 10 of all physicians 55 and over have been sued; and there is a wide variation in the number of claims depending on the specialty. The number of claims per 100 physicians was more than five times greater for general surgeons and Ob/Gyns than it was for pediatricians and psychiatrists.

The AMA adds that while 65% of claims are dropped or dismissed, they are far from cost-free. Average defense costs per claim range from more than $20,000 among claims that are dropped or dismissed to more than $100,000 for cases that go to trial.

If you need more information on a medical malpractice lawsuit you are thinking of filing, contact an attorney who also knows medicine. Call Dr. Bruce G. Fagel at 800/541-9376 or visit his website at www.fagellaw.com.

A study in the July 28 issue of JAMA finds that compared to infants born at full term, those born between 34 and 37 weeks are more likely to have severe respiratory illness, and this risk decreases with each added week of gestational age during the late pre-term period. Late pre-term birth accounts for 9.1% of all deliveries and 75% of all pre-term births in the United States.

Analysis found that for neonates born at 34 weeks, the odds of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) were increased 40-fold and that risk decreased with each advancing week of gestation until 38 weeks. Even at 37 weeks, the odds of RDS are still three-fold greater than that of a 39-40-week birth. The study says that similar patterns were seen for pneumonia, ventilator requirements and respiratory failure.

Sometimes premature births and ensuing complications are the result of medical malpractice. If you or someone you know has experienced bad medical treatment in the delivery room, you need representation by an attorney who has a medical background. Contact Dr. Bruce G. Fagel at 800/541-9376, or visit online at www.birthinjurydoctorlawyer.com.

Last week Thailand doctors protested a proposed law that would give victims of medical malpractice legal rights to sue their doctors and receive compensation. The law would be the first of its kind in Thailand, where malpractice complaints face resistance from doctors and hospitals. Many get dismissed from court for lagging too long in the system, according to the bill's proponents. The new law would create a new compensation fund that hospitals would have to contribute to that would be used to compensate victims of medical mishaps.

Doctors say they fear it would open them to increased risk of lawsuits and make the medical community nervous about performing its duties, as well as straining already tight budgets. The Medical Association of Thailand, the doctors' trade body, wrote an open letter to Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva asking him to postpone sending the Medical Malpractice Victim Protection Bill to Parliament for its first scheduled reading.

State hospitals and clinics are the main targets of malpractice suits. Of 810 complaints last year, 789 of the cases were filed against state facilities.

Proponents of the law say the gist of the bill is simple: compensation for loss and damage as the result of medical malpractice.

If you are victimized by malpractice, you should be compensated for the damage. If you need an attorney who understands our healthcare system, call Dr. Bruce G. Fagel for a free case evaluation. Contact him at 800/541-9376 or www.medicalmalpracticedoctorlawyer.com.