Posts Tagged ‘medical malpractice lawyer’

Patients’ Right to Know Act Passes IL Legislature

Monday, June 6th, 2011

In a major victory for Illinois patients and advocates for patients’ rights, such as the experienced Illinois medical malpractice lawyers of Passen Law Group, the Illinois Patients’ Right to Know Act has now passed both houses of the state legislature and is now on its way to the Governor’s desk.

If, as expected, Governor Pat Quinn signs the bill into law in June, it will provide a major step forward for patients looking to protect themselves from dangerous doctors. In a climate where scores of patients are injured or killed each day by the very professionals who they pay to safeguard their health, accurate information about a doctor’s background is an invaluable asset – and an absolute necessity.

Under the Patients’ Right to Know Act, patients will be able to access physicians’ histories online, as part of a database on all Illinois doctors. The database will allow patients to check whether a doctor has been convicted of a crime, fired, or made a payment due to medical malpractice (whether due to a judgment or a settlement) in the past five years.

This legislation has been in the works for more than ten years, but has been repeatedly scuttled by lobbyists for physicians, and the insurance companies, including the Illinois State Medical Society.  But State Representative Mary Flowers, a democrat from Chicago, persevered, and made sure the legislation was delayed, but not buried.

The bill finally passed after recent public outcry over physicians convicted of sex offenses, even sex crimes against patients, who are permitted to continue practicing. Our medical malpractice attorneys were among those who pressured our legislature to take action on this dangerous situation.

Once the bill becomes law, the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation will compile the data, and post it on the Department’s website, idfpr.com.  The Department will then update and maintain the database.

In fact, the Department has previously compiled all this information. The profiles were posted for nearly a year beginning in 2005. Unfortunately, the profiles were originally posted thanks to an amendment to the law capping medical malpractice awards in Illinois. Due to the way in which the law was written, when the Illinois Supreme Court courageously struck down the damages cap, the profiles perished, as well.

This removed the information from public accessibility. This was a travesty, and certainly not unnoticed by the public. In fact, during the year the profiles were posted, they drew over 130,000 clicks per week, proving that the public knows just how important this information is to public health and safety.

Unfortunately, the old 2005 information is now virtually obsolete. Once the bill becomes law, the Department has stated that it will take months to assemble the information for posting, as it requires data from courts, hospitals, insurance companies, and other sources.

Although we are disappointed by the likely delay, we understand that assembling the information will take time. We are eager to see the complete and accurate profiles become accessible as soon as the department is able.

Indeed, we have only one real concern about the physician profiles going live.  Many commentators have suggested that making malpractice settlements public will discourage settlements, as physicians strive to protect their practices from the consequences of public settlement. On the whole, however, we believe that the benefits to the public from these public profiles is worth the risk.  If this problem should manifest itself, then we, as a better informed public, can face it together.

For a free consultation with an experienced Chicago medical malpractice attorney at Passen Law Group, call us at (312) 527-4500.

share save 171 16 Patients Right to Know Act Passes IL Legislature

Postoperative Vision Loss: A Primer

Tuesday, May 31st, 2011

Of all the non-fatal complications of surgery, perhaps none is more traumatizing, and more unexpected, than postoperative vision loss.  Patients rarely, if ever, anticipate the possibility that when they awaken from unrelated surgery – on their back or hip, for instance – they will do so with severely impaired vision, or no vision at all.  Yet this severe complication can and does occur — often as a consequence of surgical or anesthesiology malpractice — leading to moderate to severe vision impairment, limited field of vision, or even total blindness.

The experienced medical malpractice attorneys of Passen Law Group were not surprised to learn that postoperative vision loss is on the rise.  While rates of postoperative vision loss vary from study to study, at least one study has found that this injury occurs in as many as 3.6 percent of cardiopulmonary bypass surgeries.  When all operations not involving the eye are considered, however, some studies have found rates of postoperative vision loss as low as one in every 60,965 surgeries.  Whatever the rate, however, two separate studies have recently confirmed an increase in cases of this devastating surgical mishap.

Yet scientists still have little to know understanding of the causes of postoperative vision loss.  What is known is that postoperative vision loss is tied to anesthesia – but doctors’ understanding of exactly how this works is severely limited.  Researchers have identified several known causes, but many cases of postoperative vision loss cannot be attributed to these factors.  While some researchers have additional theories as to possible causes, such as the release of stress hormones during surgery, in many cases of postoperative vision loss it is unclear how the patient’s anesthesia caused the vision loss.

Some of the known causes of postoperative vision loss are direct pressure to the eye, air emboli (or atheromatous), prolonged hypotension and anemia during anesthesia, and inadequate or improper drainage of the veins in the globe of the eye.  In rare cases, postoperative vision loss can be caused by improper administration of local anesthetic, without aspiration, which in turn allows intravascular injection and the potential for fluid emboli in the eye.

These causes are often themselves caused by improper positioning of the patient prior to surgery.  While the optimal surgical position varies, several factors must be considered:

•    the site of the operation, and where the surgeon will need access,
•    the age, height and weight of the patient,
•    the type of anesthesia being used, and
•    the type and severity of pain experienced by the patient.

Surgeons and anesthesiologist must use special care to avoid selecting positions that place pressure on the eyes, particularly in heart and spinal surgeries, where postoperative vision loss is the most common.  In particular, the prone position for surgery is known to increase the risk of postoperative vision loss.  The failure to consider alternate positions, where possible, or to carefully monitor optic pressure in surgical patients in the prone position, may constitute medical malpractice.  But whatever the surgical position chosen, to avoid postoperative vision loss the physician and anesthesiologist must pay careful attention to pressure and drainage in the eyes.

Likewise, the buildup of cerebrospinal fluid during anesthesia can cause pressure in the eye, and edema of the optic disc. Cerebrospinal pressure leads to pressure on the optic nerve, and inside the optic nerve sheath.  Because the retinal artery and vein pierce this sheath, then enter the eye itself with the optic nerve, when pressure increases this area can swell into the eye cavity, leading to permanent vision loss.

While surgeons and anesthesiologists are eager to portray postoperative vision loss as just another potential side effect of surgery, the causes listed above demonstrate that it is, in fact, often a preventable medical error.  When physicians and surgeons fail to take the proper precautions to prevent optical pressure or fluid buildup, or allow extended hypotension and anemia to deprive the eye of oxygen, then they may be guilty of medical malpractice.

Nor is postoperative vision loss the only long-term consequence of general anesthesia.  Indeed, in recent years, researchers have confirmed that the risks of general anesthesia, once thought to evaporate shortly after a patient awakens, in fact continue for years.  In a study presented at the American Society of Anesthesiologists’ annual meeting, researchers demonstrated that the longer the time spent under general anesthesia, the greater the risk that a patient will die in the two years following surgery.  And although the patients studied were all having non-cardiac surgery, heart attacks (and cancer) were the most common causes of death.

Likewise, a study published in the journal Anesthesia & Analgesia found the the length of time under general anesthesia increased the risk of dying in the following year.  Again, all the surgeries in the study were non-cardiac surgeries, but heart attacks and cancer were the primary causes of death.

For a free consultation with a top-rated Illinois medical malpractice lawyer at Passen Law Group, call us at (312) 527-4500.

share save 171 16 Postoperative Vision Loss: A Primer

Patient Rights Advocates Strongly Oppose HR 5

Wednesday, May 25th, 2011

HR 5 Opposition 300x155 Patient Rights Advocates Strongly Oppose HR 5The experienced medical malpractice attorneys of Passen Law Group have repeatedly spoken out against HR 5, the anti-patient legislation currently pending in the U.S. House of Representatives.  Last week in Roll Call, a widely read publication in Washington, DC, other patient rights advocates spoke out strongly against the bill as well.

HR 5 bears the title, the “Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare Act.”  In reality, the only aim of HR 5 is to bar  victims of negligence and malpractice from obtaining justice and recovering from wrongdoers for their injuries. HR 5 targets not only victims of medical malpractice, but also those seriously injured or killed by nursing home abuse and neglect, or by dangerous medical products, including pharmaceutical drugs and medical devices.

The House of Representatives has already voted to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (otherwise known as ObamaCare), although as the Senate has not followed suit, the Act remains law.  But the House promised to pass a bill that would also reform healthcare and provide for the needs of patients and the public.

Instead, they have given us HR 5.

Experience with “tort reform” at the state level has now taught us that eliminating the rights of medical malpractice victims does nothing to reduce medical costs or malpractice premiums.  As Gibson Vance, president of the American Association of Justice, noted in Roll Call, one out of every three hospital patients in the U.S. is the victim of medical error.  At least 98,000 Americans lose their lives each year due to medical malpractice – preventable medical mistakes.

Our Chicago medical malpractice lawyers cannot help but wonder, then, why removing responsibility from those who fail to take the precautions necessary to prevent these deaths could be sound federal policy.  The current death rate is is the equivalent of two 737 jets crashing every day.  It is inconceivable that if those crashes were occurring, Congress would be taking action to protect the airlines and airplane manufacturers from liability, and thus decrease passenger safety.

And, as Vance persuasively argued, the same house leadership advancing HR 5 has repeatedly and publicly argued that under the U.S. Constitution, the federal government must take a limited role, respect the limits of the power granted to it, and respect the rights of the states.  HR 5 flies in the face of this reasoning, dramatically expanding federal power and usurping an area of law that has historically been the province of the states.

While House leaders argue that this expansion is justified under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause, they likewise point to the Commerce Clause as the reason why ObamaCare must be repealed.  The truth is that there is no consistent reasoning or interpretation at work here – they will point to the Commerce Clause to support what they support, and to undermine what they do not.

The ordinary citizens are the ones who stand to lose the most from this lack of principle.  HR 5, and its stripping of victims rights, would remove accountability from our medical providers, leaving healthcare in the United States dramatically more dangerous than its already troublesome state.  Under HR 5, physicians, hospitals, and other providers would have far less incentive to improve safety and reduce errors, and those injured would have no real recourse in the courts.  A fine federal policy, indeed.

The top malpractice attorneys of Passen Law Group stand with Vance and the American Association for Justice.  We oppose HR 5, and any other federal or state attempt to deny justice to those who are injured.  We urge Congress to abandon HR 5, and instead to focus on reducing malpractice premiums by reducing malpractice – improving patient safety.

For a free consultation with an experienced Chicago medical malpractice lawyer at Passen Law Group, call us at (312) 527-4500.

share save 171 16 Patient Rights Advocates Strongly Oppose HR 5