From the category archives:

Medical Malpractice

The March 8th New York Times publishes a remarkably insightful opinion piece by Atul Gawande.  Gawande reminds us of a lesson learned long ago in a completely different professional context.

In 1935 the U.S. Army Air Corps held a flight competition for airplane manufacturers competing for the privilege of building the next generation long-range bomber.  Boeing seemed, to those in the know, to be the obvious winner.  It could carry five times as many bombs as the army had requested, it was fast and could travel almost twice as far as the existing equipment.

The competition was a disaster for Boeing.  Moments after takeoff the plane crashed killing the pilot and two of the five crew members.  After investigation it was clear that pilot error was the cause of the incident.  The pilot was required to attend to four engines, retractable landing gear, wing flaps, trim tabs and propellers for each engine whose pitch had to be regulated with hydraulic controls.  The pilot attending to all of these matters at the same time omitted to release a locking mechanism on the elevator and rudder controls.  The contract went to Douglas Aircraft and Boeing faced financial ruin.

Fortunately, the army purchased a few of the Boeing aircraft as test planes.  A group of test pilots came up with a brilliant and elegantly simple solution.  They created a checklist which if followed would assure that each matter that needed to be attended would be attended to at the time and in the order necessary to assure that the pilot would not be confronted with having to recall all of the various interactions since the simplest omission could be fatal.  These same pilots flew Boeing’s entry nearly 2,000,000 miles without a single accident.   The army ordered 13,000 of the aircraft which became known as the B-17.  This famous aircraft contributed to our victory in World War II.

The same lesson learned by the pilots who helped make the B-17 a safe aircraft have been resurrected sixty years later in an attempt to address preventable medical errors.  Just as the original pilot who crashed the then experimental B-17 was overwhelmed by the many routine but essential things that needed to be done and done in a particular order, similarly physicians today face the same problem.  Physicians are virtually assaulted by such a mass of information and important facts must not be overlooked, especially when to overlook a matter would be ruinous to a patient’s life.

Peter Pronovost, a critical care physician at John’s Hopkins Hospital was among the first, if not the first to give it a try.  In 2001 he created a checklist designed to tackle just one recurring problem in medicine: line infections.  He plotted the course one should take in order to avoid infections when putting in a venous or arterial line.  1.  Wash hands with soap.  2.  Clean patient’s skin with appropriate antiseptic.  3.  Put sterile drapes over the entire patient.  4.  Wear a sterile mask, cap, gown and gloves.  5.  Put a sterile dressing over the catheter site once the line is in.

Note that these steps had nothing to do with attempting to articulate the surgical skills needed to safely place the line.  Indeed, these steps have been known and taught for years.  However, Pronovost had nurses in his ICU observe doctors for one month putting lines into the patients.  In more than one-third of the patients the nurses observed that physicians omitted at least one step.

Pronovost was able in one year to reduce the ten-day line infection rate from 11% to 0.

What Pronovost observed is certainly a reality that we all confront.  Mundane matters are easily overlooked especially in the middle of a medical emergency.  Since Pronovost’s original work, other institutions have attempted similar undertakings.

Forward thinkers like Pronovost and others who followed, unfortunately are whispering in the midst of a storm.  Gawande called Pronovost recently and reports a certain pessimism.  According to Gawande, Pronovost told him, “At the current rate, it will never happen.  The fundamental problem with the quality of American medicine is we fail to view the delivery of healthcare as a science.  Once we acquire an understanding of the disease and find effective therapies for that disease, there seems little attention to assuring that the therapies are effectively delivered.”

We must not allow “The Art of Medicine” to be used as an excuse for individuality which is not a matter of informed choice but instead forgetful omission.

See related article concerning the Surgical check list

Return To Most Recent News

{ 0 comments }

Natasha Singer, in her  recent New York’s Times opinion piece suggests that saying you’re sorry is difficult in the health care industry. Indeed, her article addresses the pharmaceutical industry as well.  It is interesting that this issue requires any discussion. We all learned as children the importance of apology in making right a harm resulting from our wrongful conduct. Moreover, that there might be adverse consequences associated with admitting wrongdoing was to be expected and was not ever deemed a justification for remaining silent.

It is remarkable that silence as a substitute for apology has become a standard of conduct for healthcare providers. They argue that if they apply to this that someone might try to hold them accountable for their conduct. In other words unlike what their parents  told them as children, healthcare providers, who once knew that apology was the ethical and proper thing to do have come to believe that silence and obfuscation represent the ethical thing to do.

Remarkably, as pointed out by Singer, those medical centers such as the University of Michigan health Center have discovered honest apology makes they are victims feel good and reduces malpractice claims. The Michigan experience has been duplicated elsewhere. Honesty is not only the right thing to do but also represents a sound business practice.

One has to look elsewhere for the origin of the “conspiracy of silence” than fear of consequence.  Arrogance is a better explanation.

What do you think?

Return To Most Recent News

{ 3 comments }

A Patient Should Have a Right to Legal Advocacy

by Jerry Meyers

In 1998 the United States Advisory Commission on Consumer Protection and Quality in the healthcare industry adopted a Patient Bill of Rights. The same year Pennsylvania enacted a Patient Bill of Rights allegedly for the purpose of providing quality healthcare accountability and protection under Act 68 of 1998.
It is interesting that the legislature of [...]

Read the full article →

Heads You Win, Tails I Lose

by Jerry Meyers

Kevin Pho, M.D in his medical blog, Kevinmd.com, invites a discussion concerning whether elderly patients should choose premature death at home rather than being subjected to the complications that are associated with geriatric admissions.  He concludes that elderly patients admitted to emergency departments should be given the opportunity to choose going home rather than being [...]

Read the full article →

If Mothers only Knew- Revisited

by Jerry Meyers

News-Medical.net also reports on the trial confirming the neuro protective effect of magnesium sulfate I earlier discussed in “If Mother Only Knew.”  This report misses the point that many physicians still think the standard of practice still does not require that magnesium sulfate be administered to mothers threatening preterm delivery prior to 32 weeks.   Rouse [...]

Read the full article →

Hospital Conceals Airway Accident Resulting in Brain Damage of Child

by Jerry Meyers

This video was embedded using the YouTuber plugin by Roy Tanck. Adobe Flash Player is required to view the video.
The mother heard speaking in the above ad was present when a teenage driver recklessly careened down a quiet street striking her young son.  The teen pulled into the nearby driveway of his home not even [...]

Read the full article →

Healthcare: Crisis in Quality-Not Cost

by Jerry Meyers

I believe the public at large has for decades laboured under the impression that here we enjoy the best medical care available (Untrue. By most measures both Germany and France do better).   Perhaps this is the reason that despite the real problems Americans have faced because of the increasing cost of health care the [...]

Read the full article →

Defensive Medicine is Bad Medicine

by Jerry Meyers

Ordering tests that are considered medically unnecessary is not defensive medicine but simply thoughtless medicine. I am a lawyer of 35 years experience in representing patients and their families who are victims of medical malpractice. My clients are harmed by thoughtlessness and failed communications and not because an unneeded medical test was not performed.
The burden [...]

Read the full article →

The Electronic Medical Record-Better Medicine?

by Jerry Meyers

In a previous post I briefly discussed how communication failures in the transmission of test results are common.  Many people think that widespread use of electronic medical records systems throughout all of our health systems will improve medical care.
You cannot improve a physician’s standard of practice simply by altering the means by which records are [...]

Read the full article →

Malpractice Lawyers Make A Difference On Patient’s Safety

by Jerry Meyers

The American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, May 2, 2009, Volume 200, Number 5, publishes the results of a study conducted in partnership by the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Reproductive Science, Yale University School of Medicine, and Yale-New Haven Hospital. This study was designed to determine whether a comprehensive patient safety strategy to prevent [...]

Read the full article →