Who is reviewing your medical records?

I have spoken to many attorneys over the years, and when I ask them who reviews their medical records, I always find myself biting my tongue as I listen to their response. It is predictable, but I still cringe.

“I review my own medical records. I have to know the details anyway, so I might as well do it myself.”

“I have been doing this for a long time and I know what to look for, so I review my own medical records.”

“My paralegal reviews my medical records. She’s awesome and does a great job.”

Again and again, over and over, I get the same replies.

Let’s face it; attorneys and paralegals (unless they are physicians) are not medical experts. If I have a legal problem or question, I don’t ask another doctor, or someone who isn’t a law professional. I don’t even ask a paralegal. I ask an attorney. Who knows more about law than someone who has been to law school and has practiced as an attorney?

I understand that attorneys have their reasons for keeping their medical record reviews and analysis in house. The bottom line is, they need to understand the details of the case and know the records.

I also sympathize with the financial benefits that are gained by keeping this process in the firm. I even think in some instances, when the case is straightforward and there aren’t a lot of records and medical data to interpret, this makes perfect sense.

In most cases, though, I feel like this is a HUGE mistake, and that many attorneys underestimate the advantage they gain (both financially and strategically) by having a medical doctor look at their case records.

The review and analysis of medical records is an art. Anybody can read a medical record and put it in the right order, or write a summary and chronological timeline. But the key to exceptional medical record reviews isn’t in the reading. The key is the interpretation of the records, and this is something that only a medical professional can do well.

A medical professional can also tell you what went wrong and who did it, identify missing information, and pick up subtle pieces of data or chart entries that serve as clues and evidence to support or discount your theory.

Now don’t get me wrong! I have the utmost respect for medical malpractice, personal injury, and other attorneys that deal with medical issues. In fact, I am sometimes amazed at how much medical knowledge a good medical malpractice attorney knows. Attorneys are some of the brightest and most capable professionals that I have ever met; however, I think it is important to remember the many benefits of having a medical doctor on your team.

1) First and foremost, having a physician review your medical records will help you win your case! Think about the opposing counsel. Do you think they have doctors looking at their medical records? In most cases they will, and therefore they will have the strategic advantage.

Do you really want to be behind the eight ball from the get go? Having a physician consultant reviewing your records can help your strategy immensely, because they will know what the opposing medical expert will be arguing. You are much more likely to win your case with the input of a medical doctor.

2) A physician consultant will be able to pick things up from medical records that nobody else can, (including a legal nurse consultant). Physicians know how to interpret lab and test results and can identify subtleties in lab trends, and they will easily identify tests that should have been done and are missing.

3) Your physician consultant has trained for many years on how to make a diagnosis. We know how to formulate a differential diagnosis and consider other issues that may be playing in to your medical case.

Nobody else, except for a physician, is qualified to do this. You could be barking up the wrong tree and not even be aware of it. Meanwhile, your opposing expert has this information already, because their physician consultant was able to identify and address the issue.

4) Hiring a physician to conduct your chart reviews may seem like an alternative that is too expensive. But in the long run, it could and probably will save you hundreds of dollars. I have seen attorneys spend countless hours reviewing their own records only to find out later that the case had no merit, or that standard of care wasn’t even breached. When I was called in to review the case it was immediately obvious that there WAS no case.

I also know that there is nobody more efficient in reviewing medical records than a physician. You will save money simply because he or she will be able to do a much more thorough job in a lot less time.

5) Physician consultants can save you countless hours. We know that attorneys need to be familiar with the records and the issues of the case. But a physician can guide you through this, making it much easier for you to know what you need to know, in a lot less time. We are quicker with the review process, can dissect the medical records for you, and then we will teach you about the medical condition and highlight important parts of the record you need to be familiar with. What takes you 10 hours to do could be done in up to half the time by a physician. Plus, you get the added benefit of their knowledge and expertise.

If these things don’t convince you that you are taking chances with anyone reviewing your charts other than a physician, I encourage you to have an open mind and try something different. If it doesn’t work for you, you have lost nothing and can always go back to your old method.