In our previous post, we began looking at the issue of auditory masking in the context of medical device alarms. As we noted, auditory masking can make it difficult, if not impossible, for health care providers in emergency room and surgical settings to do their job and to appropriately respond to critical situations that arise in the provision of care.
In health care, there are a variety of things that can go wrong, both when health care providers act negligently and even when they are doing their job according to accepted standards and procedures. Some of the mistakes made by health care providers can be attributed to improper use of electronic records and other technology used in health care.
In our previous post, we pointed out that, in addition to the statutory requirements that must be met by expert witnesses, there is also the issue of the credibility of the witness that must be carefully considered. This is important not only because a witness who lacks credibility could potentially be barred from participation in the case, but also because a witness who lacks credibility will not be a valuable asset before a jury.
In recent posts, we looked briefly at what exactly an affidavit of merit is and the requirement a physician must meet in order to sign off on an affidavit. As we noted, physicians must meet the same requirements as an expert witness, which we briefly summarized last time.
In our last post, we began looking at what exactly an affidavit of merit is in the context of medical malpractice litigation. As we pointed out last time, an affidavit of merit is a document to be filed with the court which establishes the merits of the case. To that end, an affidavit provides the basic allegations establishing the elements of the medical malpractice case. Getting the affidavit right is one of the first steps to proceeding with a successful medical malpractice case. The aim is to assure the court that the claim is not frivolous.
The concept of merit is an important one when pursuing medical malpractice litigation. Merit refers to the plaintiff's basis for pursuing the claim. A case which has merit has a valid basis such that a court could find that the plaintiff's legal rights have been violated based on the claims made in the complaint.
Surgical procedures involve various risks. As we’ve pointed out in recent posts, surgeons can and do sometimes make mistakes. Sometimes these errors are serious and leave the patient with permanent health problems.
In recent posts, we’ve been discussing cancer screening guidelines in the context of medical malpractice litigation. One important point to highlight in this discussion is that cancer screening guidelines do not, in and of themselves, constitute a standard of care.
In our last post, we looked briefly at a recent study which highlighted, at least to a small extent, the concern that family physicians may not have adequate knowledge of cancer screening guidelines, at least in the context of recommending effective screening for lung cancer.
We have previously written on this blog about failure to properly diagnose cancer, and the duty of physicians recommend appropriate screening tests and track a patient's conditions, noticing potential warning signs of cancer and referring to specialists when necessary.