Friday, November 27, 2015

How Patients' High Deductible Insurance Plans Pose Malpractice Risks to Doctors

High deductible insurance plans require patients to take on more of the financial risk in exchange for lower monthly premiums.  Patients are increasingly choosing plans where they cover their own eligible expenses until costs reach a deductible that can be well into the thousands of dollars.  These high deductible insurance plans can pose a malpractice risk to doctors.

The number of patients with health insurance has increased due to the Affordable Care Act, however, most of these patients choose high deductible health plans.  The number of patients with these types of plans has increase to 17.4 million in January of 2014, up more than 12 percent from the previous year, according to Healthcare Finance.

The issue that physicians are seeing with these high deductible plans is that patients are making medical appointments less often for chronic care, and are also skipping medication refills or declining to pay their out-of-pocket costs for medical tests.

Patient choices to forgo aspects of their health care can have disconcerting implications for physicians.  A case reported in Massachusetts Medical Law Report demonstrates these potential consequences.  A physician was sued for malpractice by the family of a patient who died after a late stage cancer diagnosis.  The patient, a 65-year-old man was a patient of the physician for four years; however the physician never performed a complete physical exam during that time, including colon rectal cancer screening.

The cancer was not diagnosed until the patient went to the hospital with abdominal pain for several hours and no bowel movement for several days.  He underwent exploratory surgery where stage IIIB colon cancer was discovered.  The physician said he did not offer the patient cancer screening because he was only seeing him for blood pressure checks, not for full primary care.  The private-pay patient declined any further medical care beyond those blood pressure checks.  The case ultimately settled for $1.5 million.

The risk stems from the fact that physicians could be held responsible for patients who decline care and this risk is likely to increase as patients put off or skip screenings that are not covered by insurance. 

To protect themselves, physicians must explain the risks of skipping tests and then follow through on whether they have been performed or not.  Physicians must also document everything – the patient chart should reflect whether a patient declined appropriate screening tests, as well as whether the patient understands the possible consequences of that decision.


To learn more about the potential implications of high-deductible insurance on medical malpractice, contact us today.

Tuesday, November 24, 2015

Spending and Malpractice

Findings from a new study recently published in the BMJ and supported by the National Institutes of Health provide evidence for those who assert that practicing defensive medicine is a realistic alternative for physicians who would like to safeguard their careers and reputations.

The study focused on data between 2000 and 2009 that involved 24,637 doctors and 18,352,391 admissions to acute care hospitals in Florida. The data showed a connection between higher spending by doctors per patient and a decreased risk of incurring a medical malpractice claim.

There were 4,342 malpractice claims made during the time period under review. Generally, the analysis found that higher spending doctors get sued less often than lesser spending physicians. For example, in the obstetrics specialty, the likelihood of facing medical malpractice fell as an obstetrician performed more Cesarean sections and spent more per patient.


Directors of the study did admit limits to the findings, specifically that information on illness severity was not provided and doctors were not directly asked if their increased spending was motivated by defensive medicine. Nevertheless, even if the study doesn't necessarily demonstrate that increased spending was the direct cause of the decreased opportunity of facing a medical malpractice suit, it does demonstrate that there is a correlation and more research is probably needed to understand the link.

Friday, November 20, 2015

Comparative Negligence, Expert Witnesses, and Medical Malpractice

One would think that a wrong is a wrong, no matter where it took place and that your compensation for that wrong should also not be affected by where it happened.  However, in medical malpractice every state has different rules.  A recent lawsuit against LabCorp is an example of how those rules can reduce compensation.

A woman in Florida died of cervical cancer three years after LabCorp diagnosed two of her pap smears as negative for cancer.  Her husband filed a medical negligence lawsuit against LabCorp alleging that they misread the tests.  The jury determined that damages to her husband totaled just over $20 million, but reduced this award to $15 million because the patient was found to be 25% liable for her own negligence.

Florida follows a comparative negligence guideline in which a party’s own negligence will reduce any monetary award in proportion to the amount of the plaintiff’s negligence. Many other states follow a modified comparative negligence standard in which a party will lose any right to compensation if that party is more than 50% liable for his or her injuries.

Florida also requires medical negligence plaintiffs to file a notice of intent to initiate a medical malpractice claim, which must include an expert witness’s opinion that the plaintiff has a good basis for a lawsuit.  The notice of intent marks the start of a ninety-day settlement period that may or may not affect the statute of limitations on the case.

Other aspects of medical malpractice cases fall under differing rules in different states.  A plaintiff usually must file his or her malpractice case within two or three years of the occurrence or discovery of an injury.  Some states impose an absolute bar against any malpractice case of seven to ten years after the medical error is committed, regardless of when an injury manifests itself.

Many states have also enacted caps on damages related to pain and suffering (noneconomic).  In some instances courts have struck down those caps, but for now a plaintiff’s damages for pain and suffering can depend on what location the underlying wrong occurred.


The substantive elements of a medical malpractice case may be simple and straightforward, but the laws, rules, and standards which govern the case differ dramatically from state to state.  MediPro Solutions, LLC works with attorneys to navigate those laws and select the most highly qualified medical experts to analyze and verify a client’s malpractice case.  Contact us at your convenience for more information about our services.

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Misleading or Misreading: Why Do Radiologists Face Medical Malpractice so Often?

Radiologists make up about 3.6% of practicing medical doctors, however they rank 6th among all specialists in the number of malpractice claims for which they've been defendants. From 1985-2002, radiologists were sued more frequently than plastic surgeons, anesthesiologists, gastroenterologists, and cardiologists.

Medical malpractice cases generally arise from two issues: improper medical care resulting in harm, or a poor doctor-patient relationship.

Radiologists specialize in the analysis of injuries and disorders using techniques and medical imaging equipment such as x-rays, positron emission tomography (PET), nuclear medicine, and ultrasound. Radiologists interpret and review these scans for diagnosis including internal bleeding, cancer, or fractures.

Radiological "misses" generally relate to either missed fractures or missed diagnosis of cancer. Misinterpretations of imaging associated with the breast and breast cancer were the most common cause of misdiagnosis leading to malpractice suits.

A review of 562 breast cancer malpractice claims by medical liability insurers from 2009 to 2014, found that 61% of the claims were related to alleged delays in diagnosis. Almost 48% of those delayed-diagnosis cases included radiology to some extent.

Radiological "misses" can result in serious effects for a patient. In 2012, the National Institute of Health released a scathing report claiming that mistakes in reading radiological scans generally arise from poor technique, lack of knowledge and experience, or failures of perception.

Please contact us for more information regarding medical malpractice.

Friday, November 13, 2015

Politics and Malpractice

Dr. Steven Anagnost is a doctor in Oklahoma and, like many other physicians in the state, works in several practices and sees patients frequently. His career, nevertheless, has been distinct from several other doctors in the United States, as well as Oklahoma, largely due to his involvement with politics.

In 2010, the Oklahoma State Board of Medical Licensure began inquiring and preparing to revoke Dr. Anagnost's license after several patients suffered injury and even death after getting treatment from him. In addition, he was accused of billing for surgeries he had not performed and of improperly implanting spinal devices which he'd been paid to promote. Dr. Anagnost paid several malpractice settlements out of his own pocket rather than use his malpractice insurance.

Prior to the investigation, Dr. Anagnost had made contributions to Rick Perry's political campaign. After learning of the investigation, Perry called the Governor of Oklahoma, Mary Fallin. Fallin's general counsel, Steve Mullins, met in March 2013 with the Oklahoma State Board of Medical Licensure and Perry's phone call was part of the discussion which resulted in the dismissal of the investigation.

The media reports about Perry's phone call and Fallin's involvement surfaced two years later because a civil lawsuit against Dr. Anagnost continued in state court.  The Democratic Party in Oklahoma has called for investigation into Mullins and Fallin for possible ethical and legal violations. Fallin's office has denied wrongdoing, though time will tell whether an investigation will demonstrate otherwise.


Tuesday, November 10, 2015

Medical Malpractice And Social Media: Is It A Bad Mix?

Social media is an integral part of our culture; it can have bad and good effects on lives. Many things can go wrong when sharing or posting even seemingly benign things. Occasions have arisen where a person who has committed a crime will post or share the things they have done. In medical malpractice cases, social media can have a direct effect on both sides of the case.

For those who have a public social networking account, you are making it open for anybody to view to determine if you are being fraudulent.  If certain things are shared, this can reveal evidence that might have been useful. A public profile can be applied to discern how credible a claim really is.

Using social media during a medical malpractice case can provide the opposing lawyer a good tool. It may seem you are placing a simple photo or post, however it might have a negative effect on your case.

Many lawyers advise clients even to stay entirely away from social-media or to be very aware of the things they post on social media during an ongoing case.

Social media is now a huge section of our culture; nevertheless it might have adverse outcomes. It is crucial that you understand the consequences that may result from social media use.

Contact us today to discover how we can benefit your medical malpractice case.

Friday, November 6, 2015

Why Wisconsin Has the Least Medical Malpractice Claims in the United States

According to the National Practitioner Data Bank, only 6 out of every one million Wisconsin residents received a medical malpractice claim – the national rate is 27 out of every one million.  In 2014, Wisconsin physicians paid the least per capita in medical malpractice claims.  There were only 37 successful claims in Wisconsin in 2014. 

Wisconsin has accomplished this by taking several steps, some would argue overly drastic steps, to reduce its medical malpractice claims.  The state has enacted a $750,000 noneconomic damages cap.  Wisconsin has also included extensive expert witness testimony requirements in medical malpractice cases to establish the standard of care.  And finally, any claims greater than $1 million in total damages (both economic and noneconomic) are paid from the state’s Injured Patients and Families Compensation Fund, which has a budget of $1.2 billion.

The success in Wisconsin has caused other states to take similar steps.  Nationally, successful medical malpractice claims have decreased within the last 25 years.  In 1992, 56 out of every 1 million Americans received a medical malpractice claim.  By 2004, that number had dropped to 49 out of every 1 million, and by 2014, that number dropped to 27 out of every 1 million.

While these numbers are a relief to the health care industry and insurance providers, they are not entirely beneficial to patients with claims which do not have damages high enough to attract a qualified lawyer.  Often times, if the damages are not high enough, injured patients can have a difficult time finding a lawyer who will take their case. 


This national trend has the potential to significantly impact on both the medical and legal professions.  Contact us today for all your medical legal needs.

Tuesday, November 3, 2015

The Doctor Convicted of Murder

The successful conviction of a physician in a deliberate homicide case for their professional behavior is rare. Most cases of medical malpractice generally entail legal issues like negligence and recklessness resulting in civil claims and damages, nevertheless some cases do grow to the level of criminal accountability.

Dr. Lisa Tseng was recently convicted in California of three counts of second-degree murder for prescribing drugs which caused the overdose deaths of her patients.  Dr. Tseng had been notified by authorities of nine prior patients, primarily males in their 20s and 30s, that had died with drugs prescribed by her in their systems.

The prosecution asserted that Dr. Tseng knew that her patients were junkies and drug-seekers, and that she prescribed them drugs with the knowledge that it would cause their deaths. The defense countered that Tseng was not aware they were addicts and that they lied to her about their drug use. The defense contended that all prescribing was done in good faith.

The jury found Dr. Tseng guilty of overprescribing in 21 counts, and guilty of three counts of second-degree murder. Dr. Tseng will likely spend several years in California state prison.

Prescription drug misuse continues to rise nationwide resulting in the possibility for more doctors to be convicted in criminal cases for their drug prescribing practices.

For more information, contact us today!