This has been the trend of the medical community for decades. A belief that admitting guilt will only lead to higher medical malpractice settlement costs and higher premiums. Administrators, risk managers, and doctors all kept that belief as almost a given, thus at the moment of crisis, shoving the problem into the hands of their lawyers, in turn forcing the patient to also seek council whether they would have or not.

This turned into out to raise costs steadily as negotiations and resolutions were dragged on longer than they should have. Patients suffered and doctors suffered, but it was certainly a boon for insurance companies as they raised premiums steadily based solely on fear rather than real numbers showing that there has been no significant rise in medical malpractice suits since the 80’s.

Yet, the fear was perpetuated by politicians who decided that, rather than seek a rational solution, to instead take the easy route and attack the legal profession. State after state, including Washington, passed medical malpractice lawsuit caps in order to stem the rising cost of malpractice insurance premiums. Many state level supreme courts have since found those laws unconstitutional, including our state.

But cooler heads have prevailed. Only weeks after the Obama Administration appealed to the healthcare profession to begin approaching the patient first with problems and mistakes rather than their lawyers, a study has come out with amazing results showing that the practice of open communication not only saves money, but time and reputations.

Medical Malpractice Study

The study, funded by the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Foundation, is published in the Aug. 17 issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine.

The study involved researchers from the University of Michigan Health System (UMHS), Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and colleagues. They analyzed the 1995 to 2007 records on more than 1100 malpractice claims and requests for compensation due to medical error in order to compare and quantify the results of their program.

The UMHS launched the program in 2001, which encouraged health workers to report medical mistakes. The program gave the medical community procedural guidelines for telling patients and their families about errors. These included explaining who made the error, how it occurred and what steps were taken to prevent a similar mistake in the future. The staff involved and those in the institution would then make a sincere apology to the patient or their family and offer fair compensation for harm.

This honest and open line of communication approach reduced in the number of lawsuits and other compensation claims by a third. It also led to a faster resolution of disputes and lowered legal costs overall.

It took a while for results to start showing, but after the medical community began admitting mistakes, apologizing and offering compensation, the monthly rate for new claims fell from just over 7 per 100,000 patient encounters to 4.52 per 100,000. That’s a whopping 36% reduction.

The study also found that the average monthly rate of malpractice lawsuits filed against doctors and institutions dropped by more than 50%, from 2.13 per 100,000 patient encounters to 0.75 per 100,000.

Perhaps the most significant change was the time it took to resolve the issue. The costs for liability, including compensating patients and paying attorneys, fell by about 60%. The average cost for lawsuits that were filed decreased, from nearly $406,000 to $228,000.

Medical Malpractice Laws

The study did have a few factors that leads the medical profession as a whole with questions. One of those factors is that, though the program appears to be successful, researchers noted that medical malpractice claims in general fell during the study period, not just in the institutions involved in the study.

Researchers also could not distinguish whether the disclosures of errors originated with medical staff or were offered in response to a patient complaint. Either way, there have been an ample amount of studies that suggest lawsuits are partly emotional and that when sincere regret are voiced, apologies are made, and compensation is offered up front, then emotional part of the decision to file a lawsuit are significantly lowered.

A. Russell Localio, an associate professor of biostatistics at University of Pennsylvania who wrote an accompanying editorial, called the findings “promising.”

He pointed out that research suggests that fears of lawsuits prompt doctors to order more diagnostic tests than may be necessary. Reducing the fear of being sued could potentially help lower costs of health care in general, he said.

One obstacle to making such a program work elsewhere is that, unlike the UMHS, much of the nation’s health system is fragmented, Localio said. Errors usually aren’t caused by one person, but instead can involve communication problems between internists, surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses and technicians, he said.

Yet, these logistical problems can be resolved out of necessity. Once the health institutions such as hospitals and clinics calculate the savings of this policy, they may reconsider their current system of operations and move toward a more open approach with administrative and communication procedures that accommodate that approach.

Until then, the transition is going to be slow and there will still be those in the medical profession who will choose to approach their medical errors from a place of fear and defensiveness.

This study also does not suggest that legal professionals do not play a significant roll in protecting the rights of patients who have been seriously injured or made sicker by an error of the doctor, staff, or institutional policy. This study also does not suggest that the patient does not seek fair compensation for their pain and suffering as a result of that error.

If you or a loved one feel as if you have a medical malpractice lawsuit due to medical misconduct then one of the best decisions you can make is to contact an experienced medical malpractice lawyer at Phillips Webster. Call for a free consultation.

Learn More About:

• Medical Malpractice
• Settlements in Medical Malpractice Lawsuits
• Surgical Errors

The patient, a 47 year-old woman, was receiving acupuncture treatments in her back on Tuesday afternoon and, as many acupuncturists do for relaxation purposes, was left alone in a room. But minutes turned into more than an hour. Finally when it reached about 7:30 pm, the woman knew something was wrong.

So she stepped out of the room and to her surprise the alarms started going off. The whole staff had left and even remembered to set the alarms, but yet had not checked all of the rooms.

Realizing she was trapped inside, police say she removed the needles from her back and then called 911. The police arrived and were able to get her out.

Now the Washington State Health Department (WADOH) has confirmed that they have just opened an investigation into the clinic

Bellingham Police says it’s not a criminal case and will instead leave the issue to WADOH.

“Patients have an expectation to be treated in a safe way and that care meet standards of professional conduct,” a WADOH spokesperson said. “We are investigating the events in this case.”

The department said that it’s early in their investigation, but say the acupuncturist is licensed and that the patient was fine.

As you can imagine, the acupuncturist has not yet spoken to the media.

As with any medical procedure there is a reasonable expectation of competence and professionalism at all times. This, I think we can all agree, would probably be categorized as “not very professional.” We’re glad the patient is okay.

If you or a loved one have found that you have been seriously injured or killed because of a medical error it is still your right to seek adequate compensation for your pain and suffering to assure that another patient will not have to go through what you are. Call the Medical Malpractice Lawyers at Phillips Webster for a free consultation.

Learn More About:

• Washington Medical Malpractice Laws
• Medical Malpractice FAQs
• Surgical Errors

Yet insurance premiums have doubled since 1980.

Unfortunately people still believed it and so the insurance companies to lobby, campaign, and advertise to pass numerous laws in almost every state in the country that limit the amount patients are allowed to receive. But, at the same time, insurance premiums don’t go down in those states.

Washington was one of those states that passed a tort reform package limiting the rights of patients in 2006. Payout limits were quickly shot down, but the bill had many more provisions such as a 90 day wait period to file a medical malpractice lawsuit thus allowing the healthcare provider time to negotiate a settlement even prior to filing. Yesterday, that provision too, was deemed unconstitutional.

Reforming Reform

This is the second time in less than a year the court has rejected a legislative attempt to reform medical malpractice lawsuits. The court’s 6-3 decision said the waiting period violates the separation of powers between the legislative and judicial branches of government.

The ruling sides with two separate plaintiffs who had medical malpractice cases thrown out by lower courts over notice issues. Those cases were sent back for further action. The courts already have procedural rules for filing civil suits, and adding a 90-day notice “conflicts with the judiciary’s power to set court procedures,” wrote Justice Charles Johnson representing the 6 majority in the ruling.

Another reform was thrown out by the state Supreme Court last September on constitutional grounds. The court said a law requiring injured patients to get a certificate of merit from an expert before suing violated separation of powers doctrine and unduly burdened the right of access to courts.

The three dissenters on the supreme court called it “dramatic legislative revision.” They also warned that the decision could jeopardize several other types of notice periods in state law, such as a 60-day wait before suing state government, and wondered whether all of those provisions soon could be swept away.

Medical Malpractice Lawyers

Tort reform is going to be a big topic in the coming months as this is an election year for much of the US House and some seats in the US Senate. The opponents of medical malpractice lawsuits are not all easily identified by their republican leanings, there are also plenty of democrats riding on the band wagon also. It is all wrapped around their distaste for the recent healthcare reform legislation which seems to still be a hot button for voters.

The problem is that the issue is with the hospitals and healthcare providers. A recent analysis of the Medicare population estimated that medical errors kill 131,000 people annually, making it the fourth-leading cause of death, medical suits are only 5% of personal-injury filings, with product-liability cases another 5%. Plaintiffs lose 60% of product cases and 70% of malpractice suits.

So who is the underdog in all of these fights and debates? As always, the little guy who has no other way of defending themselves against giant insurance companies and private hospitals with multimillion dollar legal budgets in place to protect the organization’s best interest at the patient’s expense.

Don’t let this happen to you. If you find yourself getting sicker or physically hurt by the negligence of a healthcare provider or healthcare facility you need experienced and professional representation. Call Phillips Webster for a consultation on your legal rights.

Learn More About:

• Causes of Medical Malpractice
• Washington Medical Malpractice Laws
• Medical Malpractice FAQs

We detailed why the tort reform debate and the misconception of medical malpractice is a bunch of hot air earlier in this blog in the article “Tort “Reform”: The Big Payoff to Candidates That Support Malpractice Lawsuit Caps.” This article is here to explain how the Obama administration intends quell those concerns by pandering and throwing money at the issue.

Last week, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced that the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) has awarded $25 million in funding for programs to improve patient safety and lessen the number of malpractice lawsuits filed. The grants are part of a patient safety and medical liability initiative that President Obama outlined in an address last September to a joint session of Congress.

Medical Malpractice Grants

What this federal grant program intends to do is reduce preventable injuries, improve communication between doctors and patients, lower malpractice premiums, and “ensure that patients are compensated in a fair and timely manner for medical injuries, while also reducing the incidence of frivolous lawsuits,” according to an agency press release.

Most of the $25 mil (around $23 mil) will go to 20 separate programs and around $2 mil will be spent on conclusive research. The awards include 3 year grants of up to $3 mil to states and health care institutions for implementation and evaluation of patient safety and medical liability demonstrations, as well as 1 year planning grants of up to $300,000.

The grants are available to both institutions and individuals under the following guidelines:

• State governments, units of State governments, coalitions of State governments, established associations of State governments.
• Established health care systems.  Hsiao defines a health system as having capacities (e.g., hospitals, physicians), activities (e.g., health services), interconnections (e.g., financing, oversight, management), and purpose. Its components might include multiple States, localities, Tribal governments, universities, colleges, hospitals, nonprofit organizations, faith-based organization, community-based organizations, and Federal agencies.  Applicants to this FOA must share a long-established, legal entity as sponsor, and sufficient service volume to statistically power any proposed intervention.
• Organizations must also fit under AHRQ’s grant authorization under 42 USC 299c-5(c), which allows AHRQ to make grants to public and nonprofit entities.
• Any individual with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the PD/PI may work with their sponsoring organization to develop an application.  AHRQ encourages individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities to apply. AHRQ requires a minimum time commitment of 20% annual effort from the PD/PI or the Project Manager, depending upon how the applicant structures the project’s organization and work plan.

The grants are overall intended to streamline a process that the HHS views as hamstrung by complicated legal issues. The programs studied under the grants include a judge-directed legal negotiation program, “safe harbors” for state-endorsed evidence-based care guidelines, and early disclosure of medical errors by hospitals and clinics with offers of prompt compensation.

Essentially, the thinking here is the faster the process, the lower the legal costs, and thus the lower overall cost to insurance providers. The problem is that medical malpractice payouts haven’t risen since the 1980’s, but medical malpractice insurance has steadily risen consistently over the last decade with little to no explanation other than greed by the insurance companies.

Medical Malpractice Lawsuits

Yet skepticism can only go so far before it becomes unconstructive. Any system is not perfect and the medical malpractice system certainly is not. There are many states that have chosen to take medical malpractice lawsuits head on through legislation by capping the amounts paid out to plaintiffs. Unfortunately this has not lowered premiums and has only served to hurt patients with legitimate claims.

Our own home of Washington was one of those states that believed the hype. The state supreme court ended up repealing the medical malpractice law as unconstitutional. The same thing recently happened in Illinois and other similar lawsuits are making their rounds in other states that host caps as a solution.

The new grant initiative is hoping to take a different angle to a similar goal to lower costs and in turn lower premiums. In a White House blog entry, Ezekiel Emanuel, MD, PhD, special adviser for health policy at the Office of Management and Budget, noted, “As reviews by both the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and AHRQ have revealed, we lack a solid evidence base for determining which practices will provide fair and prompt compensation to patients, reduce preventable injuries, improve the quality of care, and reduce liability premiums.”

We can only hope that Mr. Emanuel’s evidence comes out positive, but we fear that no matter how states or the federal government attempt to lower costs, insurance premiums will keep on rising until  state or federal bureaucracies offer medical malpractice insurance to compete with the market and stem the rising tide of unjustified profit.

Medical Malpractice Lawyers

The proponents and creators of these grants are, of course, trying to frame the system as benefiting the patients and the physicians equally, but what the system may turn out to be is a quick stopgap to lower settlement payouts on what are major medical errors.

“This new research is the largest government investment connecting medical liability to quality and aims to improve the overall quality of healthcare,” Secretary Sebelius said.

“The goals of the HHS Patient Safety and Medical Liability initiative are widely supported throughout the healthcare system, and we solicited broad-based input to ensure that it reflects the needs of stakeholders,” AHRQ director Carolyn M. Clancy, MD, said in a statement. “The projects we have funded help create measurable differences in the safety of healthcare for patients and help bring rationality and fairness to our medical liability system.”

We have the most sincere hope that this program works and will benefit both patients and the healthcare system as a whole. We also hope that the insurance industry will be honest about their business, recognize the lowered costs, and reduce premiums accordingly, but on this last point we will certainly not be holding our breath.

If you or a loved one have found that you have been injured or killed because of a medical error it is still your right to seek adequate compensation for your pain and suffering to assure that another patient will not have to go through what you are. Call the Medical Malpractice Lawyers at Phillips Webster for a free consultation.

Learn More About:

• Washington Medical Malpractice Laws
• Medical Malpractice FAQs
• Surgical Errors

A new study has been published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) that comes out tomorrow with shocking revelations about how medical “day clinics” (in-office surgical procedures, etc.) are dropping the ball when controlling infections in their patients.

Infections are most detrimental to elder patients and young patients, but they can also serious problems in people with lowered immune systems from something as simple as the common flu. This could sometimes be fatal. In the past, as early as the turn of the 20^th century, the connection between cleanliness and infections was made. Since then, cross contamination and bacteria have been fully studied and understood as to a major cause of infection.

This new study comes on the heels of a hepatitis C outbreak in Las Vegas believed to be caused by unsafe injection practices at two now-closed clinics. In that outbreak, health officials notified 63,000 patients that they suspect to have been exposed to the blood-borne disease. Nine cases of hepatitis C were found to be directly linked to the clinics. After the investigation more than 100 other cases were suspected to be related to the outbreak, but lacked hard conclusive evidence.

The JAMA Study

It’s the first report out after calls for more vigorous inspections U.S. outpatient centers. These centers are a growing segment of the health care system.  Procedures performed at such centers include exams of the esophagus, colonoscopies and plastic surgery. They are estimated to perform more than 6 million procedures and collects $3 billion from Medicare.

In the study, researchers created a new audit tool that specifically focused on infections. Armed with the new audit tool, inspectors visited 68 centers in three states; 32 in Maryland, 20 in Oklahoma and 16 in North Carolina. At each site, inspectors followed at least one patient through an entire stay. Inspections weren’t announced ahead of time, and the general staff was notified once inspectors arrived on the premises.

The study found 67 percent of the centers had at least one lapse in infection control and 57 percent were cited for deficiencies. The study didn’t look at whether any of the lapses actually led to infections in patients.

The Experts Speak Out

Since the Nevada break-out, states have been required to use the new audit tool to inspect centers participating in Medicare. Of surveys using the tool so far, 61 percent of centers have been cited for an infection control deficiency.

Among the breaches reported by inspectors were the failure to wash hands, wear gloves and clean blood glucose meters. Clinics were observed reusing devices meant for one person or dipped into single-dose medicine vials for multiple patients.

“These are basic fundamentals of infection control, things like cleaning your hands, cleaning surfaces in patient care areas,” said lead author Dr. Melissa Schaefer of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “It’s all surprising and somewhat disappointing.”

Kathleen Sebelius, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary, said in a statement that her department is expanding its hospital infection control action plan to include the nearly 5000 ambulatory surgical centers and dialysis centers nationwide.

“These people knew they were under observation, had the opportunity to be on their best behavior and yet these lapses were still identified, some of which potentially are very dangerous and have been warned against explicitly,” said Dr. Philip Barie of Weill Cornell Medical College in New York.

Barie was not involved in the study but wrote an accompanying editorial in the journal.

Medical Malpractice Lawyers

A few centers in the study hadn’t been inspected in 12 years. State agencies have the main responsibility for making sure centers comply with federal standards, but states often fall behind because of lack of funding.

It is reasonable for a patient to expect those medical professionals who work in day-clinics to use the same standards that are expected within a hospital. Those standards are called standards because they have been decided and dictated by those who set the standards in order to protect the health of patients and the population as a whole.

Clinics, regardless of their procedures, should have infections at the first and foremost of their concerns since history has proven that they can be communicable and deadly. Particularly internal infections which can manifest themselves with flu-like symptoms and easily be misdiagnosed.

If you or a loved one has had and out-patient procedure that has resulted in an infection or other illness due to the sanitary or procedural malfeasance, then you need skilled legal council with experienced in medical malpractice lawsuits. Call Phillips Webster for a free consultation on you legal options.

Learn More About:

• Settlements in Medical Malpractice Lawsuits
• Filing a Medical Malpractice Lawsuit
• Causes of Medical Malpractice

He has been ordered to stop practicing immediately and has 20 days to respond to the allegations. At that point he must request a hearing. Olson cannot practice medicine in Washington until the charges are resolved.

Authorities say Olson touched and fondled the breasts of two female patients prior to surgical procedures in April 2010 while they were under general anesthesia. Olson admitted that it was curiosity that led him to touch the patients inappropriately, and that he had done similar acts several times before.

Because of these allegations and personal admissions, Olson is considered an immediate threat to any patient he treats. Law enforcement is investigating.

This is clearly a case of medical malpractice highlighting the inappropriate misconduct that can make a patient skeptical of further treatment. If they avoid care in the future it could mean that their illness could progress farther than it would have and cause a serious condition or even death.

If you or a loved one feel as if you have a medical malpractice lawsuit due to medical misconduct then one of the best decisions you can make is to contact an experienced medical malpractice lawyer at Phillips Webster. Call for a free consultation.

Learn More About:

• Medical Malpractice
• Settlements in Medical Malpractice Lawsuits
• Surgical Errors

The warning letters go on to accuse the spas for misbranding Lipodissolve products. The spas have made unfounded claims that the drugs they use for their lipodissolve procedures are safe and effective. Yet, these procedures have neither been evaluated nor approved by the FDA.

The companies involved have been cited for a variety of regulatory violations, including making unsupported claims that the products have an outstanding safety record and are superior to other fat loss procedures, including liposuction.

The Spas Cited are:

• Monarch Medi Spas, King of Prussia, PA
• Medical Cosmetic Enhancements, Chevy Chase, MD
• IDinHealth, Edina, MN
• All About You Med Spa, Madison, IN
• Spa 35, Boise, ID
• Pure med Spa, Boca Raton, FL

Some of the letters indicate that the companies have said that lipodissolve products can be used to treat certain medical conditions. These include male breast enlargement, benign fatty growths known as lipomas, excess fat deposits, and some surgical deformities.

The FDA stated that they are unaware of clinical evidence to support any of those claims.

What is Lipodissolve?

Lipodissolve is touted to be fat dissolving procedure that is less invasive than liposuction, a surgical procedure that literally sucks the fat from the patient with a surgical vacuum. The Lipodissolve procedure has also been called “mesotherapy”, “lipozap”, “lipotherapy”, or “injection lipolysis”. Either way, it’s primarily all the same treatment.

The Lipodissolve procedure involves a doctor or technician injecting the patient with a drug and herbal mixture intended to dissolve and permanently remove small pockets of fat from isolated parts of the body. The most commonly injected drugs are phosphatidylcholine and deoxycholate, usually in various combinations with one another.

Phosphatidylcholine – This is considered part of the Lecithin group of fatty acids that occurs in many animal and plant tissues. It is a vital substance that is in every cell in the human body. It depletes considerably in our cells as we age and its depletion has been speculated by some in the science community to contribute to the aging process.

Deoxycholate – This acid is one of the secondary bile acids, which are metabolic byproducts of intestinal bacteria. It helps the body absorb fats into the intestine and generally helps the patient pass them naturally. It usually comes in a white powdery substance.

Herbal Combinations – These can be a vast variety from harmless to marginally helpful. These combinations are more than likely specific to the spa offering the treatment and should be listed in procedural materials as to avoid allergic reactions.

What Are Lipodissolve Side Effects?

As with any relatively new procedure the side effects take time to realize. As this is essentially untested by the scientific establishment and the FDA, a comprehensive list has not been able to be compiled.

Through research done in this blog we have been able to comprise a list of possible side effects from medical data, FDA reports, and customer comments. Please note that this list is not scientific research or part of a medically endorsed research project.

Some of the side effects include:

• Post Procedure Lightheadedness – Reports are that this passes relatively quickly, within minutes to hours.
• Post Procedure Nausea – The causal effect is unknown at this time.
• Tenderness and Pain in the Treated Area – This has been reported to last up to several days to several weeks after the procedure.
• Bruising – There have been concerns that the discoloration lasts for a disproportionate amount of time.
• Scarring – Scars are permanent signs of the procedure that may require further plastic surgery to remedy or may have no remedy at all.
• Skin Deformation – These are areas of either sagging, wrinkled, or stretched patches of skin in the treatment areas that may require further plastic surgery to remedy.
• Hard Nodules in the Treated Area – There was not specific data or follow up as to the nature of these nodules.
• Serious Infection – There is a possibility of serious infection of the procedure area. It has been recommended that patients should avoid tight or restrictive clothing around the treatment areas during the healing period. These internal infections can get into the blood stream quickly and cause a series of other non-procedure related complications. If not caught soon enough these infections could cause death.

Explanations

The FDA has requested written responses from the spas within 15 business days of receipt of the warning letters. They as that the companies state how they intend to correct these violations and prevent future violations. Each warning letter stated clearly that failure to comply with the request and promptly correct the violations may result in legal action.

“We are concerned that these companies are misleading consumers,” said Janet Woodcock, M.D., director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. “It is important for anyone who is considering this voluntary procedure to understand that the products used to perform lipodissolve procedures are not approved by the FDA for fat removal.”

Protecting the Patient

These elective cosmetic procedures are very popular and growing in popularity everyday. They are generally run by trained and certified medical staff. Yet, since Lipodissolve is not an approved procedure by the FDA or the larger scientific medical community, there is no certification for the procedure. This means that there have been no standards set to assure the maximum care and protection of the patient.

The standards of the mixture used to conduct the procedure is also not standardized or approved. This means that effectiveness and side effects could vary greatly from one facility to the next. This also makes claims of effectiveness almost impossible.

We recommend that you only subject yourself to FDA approved and fully researched procedures that have a proven track record of their effectiveness. Approved procedures have standardized methods and drug mixtures that both protect the patient and give a clear set of results and side effects.

If you or someone you know has had one of these “fat dissolving” injection treatments under any name, and have found that they have suffered from adverse side effects, permanent disfiguration, or serious personal injury due to infection it is important that you find council that is experienced in Medical Malpractice lawsuits. Call Phillips Webster for a consultation as to your legal recourse.

Learn More About:

• Settlements in Medical Malpractice Lawsuits
• Filing a Medical Malpractice Lawsuit
• Causes of Medical Malpractice

Now we’ve taken it a little further. Many people don’t know how to figure out what hospital to go to. Out of the 74 hospitals, medical centers, and emergency care clinics that report to the US Department of Heath and Human Services (HHS) and the Washington State Hospital Association (WSHA) in the state of Washington, the data is 1) extremely hard to find, and 2) harder to quantify. So we’ve taken the time to help you figure out what hospitals NOT to go to.

Our list of the 10 Lowest Rated Hospitals in Washington State as according to two criteria – Patient Satisfaction Surveys & the WSHA Hospital Infection Study. The list was formulated from an examination and cross reference of the 2008-2009 data provided by the HHS hospital comparison database and various WSHA studies and consumer surveys that comprise their hospital ranking system. We put more weight on the hospital infection study and used patient satisfaction as corroborating evidence of the ranking. Generally, they matched with only a couple of exceptions.

10 Lowest Rated Hospitals in Washington State:

Please Note: National average on the Infection Study is 91.1% (Washington Average is 93.3%) and the national average for patient satisfaction is 68.6% (Washington Average is 67.6). National Avg = 91.1%/68.6%, Washington Avg = 93.3%/67.6%, the individual facilities ranking numbers are listed below the same way.

*charts provided by HHS database.

#1) Auburn Regional Medical Center – 82.1%/53.1% – This facility consistently received bad grades from both HHS and WSHA across the board. In an HHS comparison with some of the low overall statistics of the list below, their numbers were as far as 8-10 percentage points below. They also conquered the lowest patient satisfaction marks. From all of the data we studied, Auburn Regional Medical Center is the lowest rated hospital in the state.

#2) Kennewick General Hospital – 84.66%/63.1% – Kennewick is hot and doesn’t get a ton of rain so people from west of the mountains like to go there to lap up some rays on the rainy summer days. You may want to limit your activities to lying down, sitting, and lying down again, because you don’t want to get hurt. They came in a close #2 worst in the WSHA Hospital Infection study and a robust #6 worst in patient satisfaction.

#3) Valley Medical Center – 84.8%/67.7% – You may have seen Valley Medical Canter’s ads on local and regional television patting themselves on the back and inviting people to come see their new facility. We agree, consider going to the new one, because the old one’s infection study numbers are as mediocre as the patient satisfaction ratings from WSHA. At least HHS has them listed as only slightly below the national average. So congratulations to Valley Medical Center for being extremely average in their national average-ness.

#4) Island Hospital – 85.5%/75.4%– Between #3 and #4 there seems to be a gap where the numbers jump higher and the standards start to raise. Island Hospital still doesn’t rank wonderfully on the Infection Study, but in both WSHA and HHS the patients seem to love them. Particularly the staff. Island actually ranks as one of highest in the state for patient satisfaction, and the recommendations are consistent across the board. They also tout on their website as being one of the top 100 hospitals in the country. So if you survive your experience with them you are guaranteed to be happy.

#5) Sunnyside Community Hospital – 86.8%/67.7% – This teeny-weeny Yakima community hospital averages 6-10 patients per day. Not much. Their intensive care unit only has four beds. Needless to say, don’t get into a wreck on a crowded bus wreck near Sunnyside. The infection study and patient satisfaction show that their numbers for both WSHA and HHS remain just below mediocre.

#6) Lincoln Hospital – 88.3%/67.4% – The medium sized Lincoln hospital in Lincoln county was trated much more nicely by HHS than WSHA. The patient satisfaction numbers on the HHS charts below are 6-10 percentage points higher than the WSHA numbers. Regardless, their infection risk can still be improved. So can their wesite.

#7) Valley General Hospital – 88.6%/64.9% – Valley General Hospital is a hospital. They serve Eastern Snohomish County. They have people wearing white clothing and comfortable shoes. They are competent at treating ailments in most humans. If you’re getting the idea the they are almost boringly average, it shows in their numbers. They’re average to WSHA and slightly below average on HHS. But they did implement what they call the Emergency Department Process Improvement Plan in 2009. They say it was successful and that patients were satisfied. Excited? No. Satisfied? Yes. But from check in to discharge the shaved off almost a whole hour. BAM! Medical care! I’m not quite sure if that’s good, but kudos…I guess.

#8) Lourdes Medical Center – 89.3%/ n/a – Lourdes is located in Pasco, Washington and according to their website they are awesome. Unfortunately, there is no patient satisfaction data from either the HHS or WSHA so I guess we can only take their word for it. And the fact that they didn’t rate very well in the infection study, that might say volumes. Healthgrades.com, a healthcare rating and finding website (who contributed no information to this list because their rating methodology is unknown) says that they rated Lourdes far below the national average.

#9) MultiCare Good Samaritan Hospital – 89.5/60.7 – This Pierce County non-profit hospital seems to be ever expanding. They state on their website that they have 98 locations for people to be dissatisfied with them in. The have multiple types of care listed amongst their many facilities that cover Allenmore Hospital, Good Samaritan Hospital, Mary Bridge Children’s Hospital & Health Center, and Tacoma General Hospital. They are the largest private employer in Pierce county with almost 9000 employees. They are by far the largest organization on this list. Does their size give them a pass? No. Most of the large hospitals were at the top of the list. This might be an administrative problem.

#10) Greys Harbor Community Hospital – 90.7%/68.5% – This small Grays Harbor County hospital serves a fairly large community. Their patient satisfaction numbers have gone down from 75% in 2008. This may have something to do with being the only game in town or it could be the fact that the bad economy has hit Aberdeen especially hard and people are just down in general. It also could be a funding issue or a turnover issue. Whatever it is, they have the potential to bump into the above average category with a little work.

Things to consider

This list was compiled of hospitals in Washington State that actually report to the WSHA in some capacity. Out of their members, about 25 percent of the hospitals offered limited to no data. This left them off of this list. It may be because they are too small and lack the resources or a matter of low self esteem.

Either way, their lack of reporting has kept them off of this list but should raise scrutiny. Check the WSHA website for their membership and criteria.

The biggest concern that these numbers raise is the risk of infection. There have been other studies conducted to be able to gauge the overall efficiency and effectiveness of a hospital by measuring instances of lung and staff infections not related to the original wound or illness. There was even a study to measure the volume of various cleaners used by the facilities as according to the number of beds and patient volume to determine exposure to infections and cross contamination within facilities.

Medical Malpractice

These studies show that no matter what the person’s injury or ailment, their ability to fight infection lowers during the healing process. That’s why it is important that the facility protect the patient and not expose the patient to further harm through lax policies, understaffing, or profit-centric administrative policies.

As a patient it is your right to expect and receive the proper care that you need so that you can heal and once again lead a healthy productive life. If you or a loved one has an ailment that has gotten worse or has died due to the policies of the medical facility or health care providers within the facility the only thing protecting your rights is the legal system. Call Phillips Webster for a consultation as to your legal rights.

Learn More About:

• Medical Malpractice
• Wrongful Death Lawsuits
• Settlements for Medical Malpractice Lawsuits
• Wrongful Death Statute of Limitations

This report was confirmed by Brian Oxman, an attorney for Joe Jackson, told media outlets yesterday he has already mailed a notice to Dr. Conrad Murray informing him that they will be filing the civil suit within 90 days.

Oxman said that the suit accuses Murray of waiting too long to dial 911, a fatal error that could have sealed the King of Pop’s fate. Oxman charged in an earlier interview that Michael Jackson could have been revived if paramedics had gotten there sooner.

In addition the suit will also argue that the type of anesthetic and the quantity that Murray administered to Jackson prior to his death “was reckless, and it amounts to second-degree murder,”

“The continuous administration of drugs over six weeks — he (Murray) gave him propofol every night — that is Russian roulette, that is loading six bullets into a gun with only six chambers,” Oxman told Reuters.

After Oxman was finished giving his statement yesterday, one of Murray’s spokesman told Reuters he had not yet received Oxman’s notice, and would not comment on the lawyer’s new allegations until he had seen the papers.

In California, the plaintiff is required by law to give Murray 90 days notice before filing a wrongful death lawsuit. This deadline coincides with another requirement that a civil suit be filed within a year of the death.

Oxman admitted that the 90 days deadline was the reason Jackson’s father has decided to move forward on the suit, but also said it has taken until now to gather required evidence.

“Having records, instead of just speculation, has been very important and hard to do, but we (now) finally have the records so we can tell what happened,” Oxman told the LA Times.

This suit follows a suit filed last week by Alberto Alvarez, Jackson’s ex Logistics Director, who told investigators that Murray actually delayed calling 911 and stopped performing CPR on Jackson so to find a place to hide the drugs he had administered to Jackson.

Murray’s lawyer disputes the claim. He points out that Alvaraz did not mention the vials in an earlier statement to investigators and that this is a new charge.

Los Angeles officials have ruled Jackson’s June 25 death a homicide caused by “acute propofol intoxication.” Murray is currently free on $75,000 bail after pleading not guilty to involuntary manslaughter in criminal court.

Wrongful Death suits can be hard to prove, but investigators had done a thorough job prior to charging Murray. If indicted of the crime, Murray may have a much harder time fighting the civil lawsuits filed by both Joe Jackson and Alvarez.

If you or a loved one have died due to medical malpractice or you feel that you have a wrongful death lawsuit due to other circumstances then call Phillips Webster for a free consultation on your legal options from an experienced attorney in wrongful death lawsuits and medical malpractice settlements.

Learn More About:

• Causes of Medical Malpractice
• Defendants in Medical Malpractice Cases
• Surgical Errors

Is there a national ranking standard? No, not really. Why? Hearst Newspapers recently answered that question during their investigation that found that state and federal governments collect a treasure trove of safety information. Unfortunately, they don’t allow the public to see it.

This information doesn’t have specific patient information. It also doesn’t violate any other privacy laws if it were compiled and released. So why not release it? The short answer is healthcare cost, insurance premiums, and medical malpractice insurance premiums and lawsuits.

The Investigation

Hearst Newspapers and Niagara Health Quality Coalition of New York analyzed publicly available data in four states for 2007, the last year available to them. They identified the hospitals with the best and worst safety indicators. They found through their analysis that it was a service the federal government could do itself.

This is a clear indication of the dismal state of the federal medical error reporting methods. The frequency of errors was underlined in a report issued in early March by the Inspector General of the federal Department of Health and Human Services.

If the report is any indication of the general practices of hospitals around the country then that means hospitals aren’t tracking their adverse events internally let alone reporting them publicly. The Inspector General investigated 278 hospitalizations in two undisclosed counties. It uncovered 120 problematic “events” in which patients were harmed either permanently or temporarily. Yet the hospitals in the federal investigation had only done incidents reports on 8 of the 120 cases. They even missed two of three cases where patients were killed, the report stated.

This revelation may come as a shock to many. Yet, it may be indicative of a systemic problem where each department’s funding is based on results and could be severely cut if they comprehensively report permanent and fatal mistakes.

Systemic Problem

It’s pretty obvious that members of Congress have been fully aware of this problem, but have, by-in-large, avoided enacting meaningful change. Federal agencies have taken baby steps, and the states, left to decide how data is disseminated and distributed, have created a system fragmented and chaotic bureaucracy.

Hospitals themselves and the health care industry have resisted public reporting of medical errors. Healthcare lobbyists are some of the most financially aggressive in Congress than any other industry to the tune of $500 million a year. It’s unclear how much of that money was related to error reporting, but as much as the tort reform issue has been on the lips of politicians, the reporting of errors will be just as important since they are so closely tied.

Not to be too critical. Hospitals certainly use the safety data privately to make improvements. They are critical of public reports that inevitably put underperforming hospitals at a disadvantage and prone to medical malpractice lawsuits.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), an arm of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, is in charge of collecting records of errors from 41 states. When it collects the data, instead of compiling it into a single report that would benefit patients, it uses the data for merely state-level compilations, which provide no hospital-specific information for the consumer.

Lisa McGiffert, director of Consumer Union’s Safe Patient Campaign, said tantamount to Consumer Reports refusing to name the best and worst cars in America. They requested the AHRQ data under the Freedom of Information Act and the agency flatly refused.

The Consumer Union is a nonprofit focusing on patient safety whom has urged citizens to send a letter to the president regarding this issue. In it they cite a study published in The National Academies Press called, “To Err Is Human”. It is a comprehensive study conducted in 1999 documenting the epidemic of medical errors plaguing the U.S. health care system and suggested methods to make patients safer.

The study remains relevant since nothing has changed. To put this into perspective, hospitals have existed in the United States for 300 years. The Department of Health and Human Services has existed for 57 years and hospitals are still hiding essential information that could aid patients in determining their personal care. Pathetic.

UW Medical Finds out Federal Ranking and Internet Ranking are Different Animals

Recently US News and World Report made a gallant attempt to rank 900 hospitals based on their cancer care departments only. Some of the household names in hospitals were on the list, Mayo Clinic, Johns Hopkins, and Mass General. Much to UW Medical Center’s delight they popped up at #7 on the list. Needless to say, they were giddy.

But the Hearst investigation burst their bubble. By using public disclosure, Hearst was able to get medical error information from four states, New York, Texas, California and Washington State from as early as 2002. The administrative data (billing or discharge data) contains information on the condition and treatment outcome of every patient. The records did not include patient identities.

Using that information the NHQC applied AHRQ’s quality and safety measures to billing data to create unranked report cards on New York hospitals. But for the first time, NHQC identified the top and bottom hospitals in two states, New York and Washington.

Several hospitals that made the Top 20 list of hospitals published by U.S. News and World report scored poorly in the NHQC study. They include Mt. Sinai Hospital in New York and sadly the University of Washington Medical Center.

Dr. Gene Peterson, associate medical director at the Seattle hospital, didn’t dispute the data. He was familiar with it, but said that, as one of the largest teaching hospitals in the country, they treat some of the sickest patients. He pointed out that in some cases the data might be misleading because of inconsistent reporting of the condition of patients on admission. He said patient safety is “our overwhelming strategy.”

Wrongful Death and Medical Malpractice

Though there is no question that hospitals do not deliberately aim to hurt or kill patients, but without reporting it is impossible for the public to know if their furthering injury or loved one’s death was avoidable due to the direct procedural policy of the hospital for cost cutting reasons. Many patients die from infections directly linked to these policies.

Last year Hearst reporters did another data analysis of medical errors titled Dead By Mistake. That project revealed the neglect to address medical errors and hospital-acquired infections, which are blamed for 200,000 annual deaths, the number one cause of accidental fatalities.

Many people feel as if they are safe when the finally get to hospital, but there are many other factors working against them and sometimes they aren’t just related to their injury or illness. There is a system of profit that filters through every level of healthcare and dictates the policies that can drastically affect a patient’s care.

The profit machine is the crux of the reporting problem. There is no healthcare police and politicians have clearly shown that they are on the side of two of the largest lobbies on Capitol Hill, Medicine and Insurance. The only protection a patient has to protect themselves and hold the healthcare institution accountable is to use litigation.

If you or a loved one have been severely injured or killed by suspected medical malpractice then it is important that you find experienced council that can clearly explain your rights and represent you in your fight to protect those rights. Call Phillips Webster for a consultation on your legal options.

Learn More About:

• Causes of Medical Malpractice
• Defendants in Medical Malpractice Cases
• Surgical Errors