Angela Leone, Author at New Jersey Medical Malpractice Lawyers - NJ Personal Injury Attorneys

Good seats still available in America’s worst nursing homes

Imagine opening up the newspaper and learning that your grandmother was resting comfortably in one of the nation’s worst nursing home. That’s right, your elderly loved one’s savings and insurance dollars going to paying for care at a facility noted for offenses involving unnecessary use of medication, bed sores, unlawful use of restraints, and inadequate safeguards to protect patients from day-to-day hazards in the nursing home.
After initially resisting their disclosure to the folks who paid for the survey- the taxpayers- the Bush administration finally published the names of 131 nursing homes with poor inspection records.

While any nursing home can make mistakes in elder care, the listed nursing homes have institutional deficits that have been ignored far too long. If your loved one is a patient at one of these facilities you should demand to know what steps are being taken to improve. Better yet, move your love one to a better facility – or at least to a facility that is not one of the worst in the country. Click here for the complete worst nursing home list.

In order to prevent other potential abuses in nursing homes go to our nursing home abuse page.

John R.Mininno, Esq. is a New Jersey and Pennsylvania trial lawyer representing clients in medical malpractice, defective products and other serious injury claims. He also writes about issues concerning patient safety. His offices are in Collingswood, NJ and Philadelphia, PA.

23 Facts About Medical Malpractice

Doctors and politicians like to blame attorneys for the high cost of malpractice insurance but the truth is that doctors make severe errors that hurt or kill thousands of patients each year. Here are the facts.

98,000 deaths each year are due to medical errors. – Institute of Health, National Academy of Sciences (1999)
Deaths by medical errors each year exceeded the number of deaths due to motor vehicle accidents, breast cancer and AIDS. – Institute of Health, National Academy of Sciences (1999)
More than 10% of common surgical procedures are unnecessary or inappropriate. – USA Today(7/24/02)
In the year 2000, the Center for Disease Control found that there were 90,000 deaths due to hospital infections.- Chicago Tribune (7/21/02)
In West Virginia, 40 doctors were found to account for 25% of all of the 2,300 cases of malpractice reported to the West Virginia Board of Medical Examiners since 1993. – West Virginia Gazette Mail
Full and prompt disclosure of medical errors to the patient followed with fair compensation for the injury caused has reduced litigation costs in Veterans Hospitals. – United States Department of Veteran Affairs
Medical errors kill more people each year than auto accidents. – Paul C. Weiler, A Measure of Malpractice: Medical Injury, Malpractice, Litigation and Patient Compensation (1993), Harvard University Press
Medical errors produce more permanent disabilities than do workplace accidents. – Paul C. Weiler, A Measure of Malpractice: Medical Injury, Malpractice, Litigation and Patient Compensation (1993) – Harvard University Press
In New Jersey if a physician has been sanctioned by the Board of Medical Examiners, consumers can find out nothing about the complaints or disciplinary action. – Asbury Park Press (1/31/02)
Getting a formal hearing with the New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs and its Board of Medical Examiners can take a member of the public up to 2 years. – Asbury Park Press (1/30/02)
Doctors disciplined for gross negligence received on average 3 month suspensions. – Asbury Park Press (1/28/02)
An Asbury Park Press Review of 483 disciplinary records since 1995 showed the Board of Medical Examiners issued reprimands to 3 doctors in 3 cases court. – Asbury Park Press (1/30/02)
20,000 physicians, or 5% are alcoholics, drug addicts, senile, criminals or are incompetent and should not be practicing medicine. New England Journal of Medicine (10/5/87)
Only 1,974 doctors out of 623,000 doctors nationwide were disciplined as a result of their actions. This represents .32% or 3.2 doctors out of 1,000. – Public Citizen Health Research Group Report, September 1993
States do not have the resources available to adequately investigate claims and discipline doctors. 53.6% of the doctors disciplined by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and 44.6% of the doctors disciplined by Medicare were not disciplined by the states in their disciplinary process. – Public Citizen Health Research Group Report, September 1993
In the year 2000 nearly 3/4 of the deadly infections found in hospitals-or about 75,000-were preventable, the result of unsanitary facilities, germ-laden instruments, unwashed hands and other lapses. – Chicago Tribune (7/21/02)
Deaths linked to hospital germs represent the fourth leading cause of death among Americans, behind heart disease, cancer, and strokes. – Chicago Tribune (7/21/02)
Hospital infections kill more people each year than car accidents, fires and drowning combined. – Chicago Tribune (7/21/02)
Strict adherence to clean-hands policies in hospitals cold prevent the deaths of up to 20,000 patients each year. – Chicago Tribune (7/21/02)
Since 1995, more than 75 percent of all hospitals have been cited for significant cleanliness and sanitation violations. – Chicago Tribune (7/21/02)
About 2.1 million patients each year, or 6% will contract a hospital-acquired infection. – Chicago Tribune (7/21/02)
The deaths of 2,610 infants in the year 2000 were linked to preventable hospital-acquired infections. – Chicago Tribune (7/22/02)
Diagnosis of breast cancer was delayed in 9% of patients in a recent study because physicians wrongly ascribed a benign status to a palpable mass. – Archives of Internal Medicine (6/24/02)

If you or a loved one has been harmed by medical malpractice, you may have a claim for damages. For more information, please go to the New Jersey Medical Malpractice Attorneys page.

John R. Mininno, Esq.is a New Jersey and Pennsylvania trial lawyer representing clients in medical malpractice, defective products and other serious injury claims. He also writes about issues concerning patient safety. His offices are in Collingswood, NJ and Philadelphia, PA.

Fentanyl Patches Recall

In the month of February, Fentanyl prescription patches were recalled for the second time because of a product defect that could cause patients to overdose on the potent drug inside.

Actavis South Atlantic, the manufacturer admitted that several lots of the patches sold nationwide might have a defect. The dosages are 25-microgram-per-hour, 50-microgram-per-hour, 75 microgram-per-hour and 100 microgram-per-hour. The patches have expiration dates of May through August 2009. A contract manufacturer, Corium International Inc., manufactured the patches for Actavis.

Similarly, in January of 2008 Johnson & Johnson and Novartis AG’s Sandoz voluntarily recalled a version of Duragesic that also contains Fentanyl. Again, these manufacturers admitted that certain defects might cause leaks that can lead to fatal overdoses. Those recalled patches, manufactured by Alza Corp. on behald of Sandoz Inc. in the U.S have expiration dates on or before December 2009. The defect is an opening that could result in release of the gel made of the drug Fentanyl inside.

Fentanyl is an opioid-based analgesic. High dosages of Fentanyl can lead to severe cardiac and respiratory arrest especially in the elderly and other chronically ill patients. This patient population uses Fentanyl frequently thus increasing the risk of overdoses and death.

Unfortunately, other than the recall, these manufacturers have provided little else in the way of information as to the dangers associated with these patches. Many patients have no way of knowing whether their patch is defective or harmful. More should be done to warn the elderly and other patients before they are harmed.

If you or a loved one has been harmed by an overdose of Fentanyl after using this patch, you may have a claim for damages. For more information, please go to the New Jersey Medical Malpractice Attorneys page.

Avoiding Medical Malpractice

Every day, attorney John Mininno encounters at least one case of medical malpractice that could have been avoided by greater patient involvement. With medical errors at an all-time high, patient advocacy has come to the forefront of national concern. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has even dedicated the first week of March to national patient safety and awareness in hopes of curbing this trend. In response to these growing concerns, Mininno offers five practical tips to avoid becoming the victim of medical malpractice.

1. Actually read the consent form and ask questions: Fighting the temptation to skim the consent form and get on with the show? Think again. “A safe patient is an informed patient,’ says Mininno. Although medical forms can be overwhelming, Mininno encourages patients to get involved in the process. “Find out exactly who will be performing the surgery, what are the risks or possible side effects and if there are any alternative treatments. More importantly, don’t be afraid to ask your doctor how many times he or she has actually performed the surgery that you are about to undergo.’ If you are not satisfied with the answers you receive, Mininno suggests postponing the procedure until you find a doctor who can answers these questions.

2. Do not assume your doctor has a crystal ball: By providing a very clear and detailed medical history, you will avoid becoming the victim of inappropriate medical treatment. “Prior medical conditions can affect your doctor’s choice of treatment. This is especially true in an emergency room setting where you do not have a relationship with the particular doctor treating you,’ says Mininno. This is also true regarding primary care physicians who see hundreds of patients on a daily basis. “Don’t assume your doctor remembers everything about you and your medical history. It’s just not possible.’ To ensure you are prescribed the appropriate medication and given the right treatment, Mininno suggests compiling a list of your current medications and their doses (including over the counter drugs and vitamins). “Having a list prepared ahead of time ensures that you will not forget to tell the doctor something that could be a key to your treatment options.’

Check (and double check) all prescription labels: Whether it’s a pharmacist that can’t read the doctor’s handwriting or a misplaced decimal point, statistics show that millions of patients each year are affected by simple medication errors that can easily be avoided. Mininno insists that increased awareness can solve this problem. “While the doctor is writing the script, ask exactly what you are being prescribed and what dose will you be taking. Then when you get to the pharmacy, make sure the label matches what you have been told.’ Mininno also advises that you become familiar with the section of the label that describes what the pill should actually look like. “If you don’t feel that the pill you have in the bottle matches the label, call your pharmacist immediately.’

3. Physically mark the site of your surgery: Although this suggestion sounds silly, doctors are actually supposed to mark with a pen the site you will be operated on. “Unfortunately, many doctors ignore this rule and patients end up losing the wrong limb or getting a totally different surgery than what they signed up for,’ says Mininno. Instead, Mininno strongly urges that you take matters into your own hands and physically designate with a pen or a marker the site of your operation and the intended location of the incision.

4. Honesty is the best policy. Mininno encourages patients to remember that doctors are there to help you, not judge you. Therefore, he insists that it’s important to be open and honest with your doctor in every situation. “Sometimes patients are embarrassed to tell their doctor if they are taking medications not prescribed to them or if they have a substance abuse problem. Or it could be as simple as failing to tell your doctor that you never went on that diet program from the previous month.’ Either way, Mininno states that you are setting yourself up for a problem. “If your doctor can not assess the true nature of the situation, you may be prescribed a deadly medication combination or be given treatment for the wrong issue.

Attorney John R. Mininno, Esq

Should Parents Decide Whether Their Infant Is Screened For Treatable Diseases?

LiveScience.com ran a story last week about a Nebraskan couple who did not want any health screenings for their newborn. The couple was appealing mandatory testing laws that exist in every state, claiming that it was a violation of their freedom of religion. The couple practices Scientology. The mandatory health screening consists of nothing more than drawing blood from the baby’s foot and then testing it for rare health diseases that can be cured. Some of these diseases can lead to brain damage and even early death.

The parent intentions are honorable. They claim that their religous practices prohibit such testing. However, the religous textbook cited in the article does not state in bold letters. “Do not use this test.” If it did, then maybe, just maybe this rule violates their freedom of religion. Their cited text makes only vague references to medicine and they have extrapolated their own interpretation to determine that test their child would be in violation of their tenets. However, it is not convincing to me that anyone – the baby in question for example – would consciously choose retardation or death and scientology over good health and some other subsequently remaining belief system. The real question in this case is whether or not parents can control the religion that their children will practice, by way of risking said child’s health at birth.

How do we answer such a question? Perhaps, just as this family is appealing their claim under the constitution, and the first amendment from the bill of rights, the framer’s can shed some light on this topic. The Declaration of Independence, the founding document of this nation, declares that all men have certain unalienable rights, such as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These certain unalienable rights apply today, and were the founding concept of this nation. They unquestionably mean that everyone has a choice in their own path. We must consider these rights as applying to an infant child, and further, assume that they are the three things that would be most important to this child, just as they’re the most important rights upon which this country was founded. It seems evident that good health would fall under these rights. However, this is a difficult question which will be debated for some time.

If you have a question regarding a birth injury or other medical malpractice,please go to our birth injury webpage.

John R. Mininno, Esq. is a New Jersey and Pennsylvania trial lawyer representing clients in medical malpractice, defective products and other serious injury claims. He also writes about issues concerning patient safety. His offices are in Collingswood, NJ and Philadelphia, PA.

Myth – Malpractice Insurance Premiums Driving Doctors Out of Business?

A new study that will appear in the May/June issue of the journal Health Affairs debunking the claims of the American Medical Association (AMA) and malpractice pundits in Washington that high malpractice insurance premiums are driving doctors out of business.

The study reveals that medical malpractice rate have actually declined. Based on year 2000 dollars, mean malpractice premiums increased from $5,934 in 1970 to $20,106 in 1986, and then declined to $15,478 in 1996. Premiums rose from 1996 until the AMA discontinued the surveys in 2000, when mean premiums were $18,400, still lower than 1986, the study said.

However, the study conceded that when you look at percentage of total practice expenses, premiums haven’t changed that much. In 1970, they were 6% of expenses. They then rose to 11% in 1986, dropped to 6% in 1996, and rose slightly to 7% in 2000.

Nevertheless, the Chambers of commerce and other groups who want to limit the public’s access to the courts will continue to spend millions of dollars each year to convince ordinary citizens that their is a lawsuit crisis in this country.

Source: Forbes.com

What’s More frivolous; Medical Malpractice Claims or the Doctor’s Defenses?

Insurance industry lobbyist continue to pay millions of dollars to portray trial attorneys as evildoers who are directly responsible for high medical insurance rates and driving doctors out of business. Malpractice attorneys respond that they are protecting the rights of those who were wrongly injured and deserve compensation.

Both sides cite a study conducted of 1452 malpractice cases conducted by David M. Studdert, an attorney and health-policy researcher at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, as evidence for their side.

The actual numbers are as follows:

37 cases had no injury, 6 were compensated
515 cases involved injuries but no medical errors, 145 were compensated
889 cases involved injuries and errors, 236 were not compensated

Ideally, we’d want all 889 deserving cases compensated and the 552 undeserving cases thrown out. Clearly, there’s room for improvement. That said, here’s the media’s take on this.

The sympathetic view, argued in this ScienceNews.org article, reports that

The majority of payments from insurance companies went to people who had been harmed by medical errors, not to people with baseless claims, the data show. That suggests that “moves to combat frivolous litigation will have a limited effect on total costs,” the authors say.

The study also found that about 85% of cases were settled out of court and of those that did go to trial, about 80% lost.

That said, the researchers found that 97% of the patients did suffer some type of harm. In about one-third of the cases, the damages weren’t clearly attributable to medical negligence or misdiagnosis and in such cases, most were not compensated.

Among the plaintiffs who received compensation were 6 uninjured people and 145 injured individuals whose injuries had not been convincingly linked to medical error. On the other hand, 236 plaintiffs who did suffer an injury from medical error received no compensation.

“This research shows that the problem with medical-malpractice litigation is not that too many undeserving people get paid, but rather that not enough deserving people get paid,” says Tom Baker, an attorney at the University of Connecticut in Hartford.

Nevertheless, 73 percent of plaintiffs whose claims had merit received compensation, according to the study. That figure suggests that the fact-finding involved in litigation, although expensive and time-consuming, “does a pretty good job of sorting out valid from invalid claims,” says Neil Vidmar, a social psychologist at Duke University in Durham, N.C.

A much less sympathetic view,comes unsurprisingly, from the American Medical Association. This group cites the same study as proof that

a substantial number of meritless claims continue to slip through the cracks, “clogging the courts” and forcing doctors to waste time defending them

Still, like doctors, most trial lawyers don’t want to spend time and effort on groundless cases. Many work off a contingency fee and only get paid if the claim is compensated. They spend hours carefully screening cases and only take cases that have true merit and deserving victims. To them, it doesn’t make sense to bring a frivolous lawsuit that could take upwards of 6 years and thousands of dollars out of their own pocket and not be compensated for their efforts.

If you or a loved one has been harmed as a result of medical malpractice, you may have a claim for damages. For more information, please go to the New Jersey Medical Malpractice Attorneys page.

John R. Mininno, Esq. is a New Jersey and Pennsylvania trial lawyer representing clients in medical malpractice, defective products and other serious injury claims. He also writes about issues concerning patient safety. His offices are in Collingswood, NJ and Philadelphia, PA.

Jury Awards Nearly $800,000 in Medical Negligence Suit

Today, October 23, 2006, a Camden County jury found in favor of The Family of Mr. Robert Boylan in a medical malpractice suit. The defendants were B. Dawson, Shoemaker, M.D., Joseph Szgalsky, M.D.and Megan Vermeulen, M.D. The jury found both Dr. Shoemaker and Dr. Szgalsky responsible. The jury awarded nearly $800,000 in damages. The trial lasted three weeks before The Honorable Ronald J. Freeman. The jury deliberated 2 1/2 days. Attorney for the family of Robert Boylan was John R. Mininno, Esquire of the Mininno Law Office.

If you or a loved one has been harmed by Medical malpractice, you may have a claim for damages. For more information, please go to the New Jersey Medical Malpractice Attorneys page.

John R.Mininno, Esq. is a New Jersey and Pennsylvania trial lawyer representing clients in medical malpractice, defective products and other serious injury claims. He also writes about issues concerning patient safety. His offices are in Collingswood, NJ and Philadelphia, PA.

Why New Jersey Should Extend the Time Limits of Its Statutes of Limitations

A statute of limitations is a law that effectively places a time limit on suing another party. While there are some important reasons for having statutes of limitations, there are also some good reasons why these time limits in New Jersey are too short. In New Jersey, the limitations on suits for Personal Injury, Negligence, Wrongful Death and Medical Malpractice are all two years after the discovery of the injury. The date of the discovery of the injury is included in the two year period. While at first two years may seem like a reasonable amount of time for some injuries, it certainly is not for many others.

Consider a hypothetical situation where a patient, with no family to act on his/her behalf, suffers from some kind of substantial medical malpractice that makes a short hospital visit into one taking months. This incapacitated patient discovered the malpractice as soon as it occurred, leaving him two years to bring a suit against the doctor or hospital. Because of the hospital stay and because this patient has no family to act on his/her behalf, s/he is left with very little time to bring a lawsuit, for which preparations can be time-consuming. Choosing the right lawyer in itself can be a difficult task and is the most important part of bringing a successful lawsuit. A victim, such as the one in this hypothetical, is left with little time to act, because of this short time period from the New Jersey statute of limitations.

In some states, these statutes of limitations are even shorter for medical malpractice than other types of professional malpractice suits, such as suing lawyers or financial advisors. New Jersey ought to do two things for its citizens. First, they must disseminate these laws to the public. Many people in New Jersey have no idea that a time limit exists on these types of law suits and, therefore, fail to bring them within a timely fashion. Second, the politicians should reconsider the time limits that these laws create. While total abolishment of the Statutes of Limitations would not be a perfect solution to this problem, extending the time limits to a more reasonable amount of time for a victimized party is necessary. It appears as though these limitations protect the party who has caused harm to another, rather than the other way around.

Free Legal Advice: Medical Malpractice

Medical Malpractice and Cosmetic Surgery

On Friday, June 23rd, a Superior Court judge decided not to overturn a civil jury’s decision to rule against medical malpractice on the part of surgeon Dr. Richard Marfuggi. The Daily Record, a local newspaper in New Jersey, explained that Marfuggi is a renowned plastic surgeon, who specializes in breast implant and reduction surgeries. Deborah Wrede, the patient, claims that Marfuggi left her “mutilated and flat chested,” reported the Record.

Regardless of the particulars, this case’s broader implications of cosmetic surgery and medical malpractice may continue to be a point of contention in New Jersey courts. The question for a jury in a medical malpractice case is whether or not a doctor deviated from the standard of care that any reasonably prudent doctor would hold him or herself to in the same or similar situation. The interesting part of this case is that it focuses on cosmetic surgery, not critical surgery. For critical surgery, courts have ruled to expose a brightline standard, making the jobs of future juries less speculative. For an extreme example, imagine a minor surgery, such as the removal of a benign cyst, which results in the death of a healthy patient. It seems relatively clear that this would be gross malpractice, because no patient should die in that situation.

Here, in the cosmetic realm, this jury has espoused through its ruling that, whether or not a doctor meets the specifications of a patient, he or she may still be acting “prudently.” It does not seem reasonable for a patient to be so displeased with cosmetic work that she would say of herself to be “mutilated,” yet still have to pay a doctor for his so-called “prudent” work. Breast reduction surgery seems to be a fairly common surgery in this day and age. If this case is seen as precedence for cases to come, it may be hard for displeased patients of cosmetic surgeons to win civil suits against them. Fortunately, in the counter, if this trend continues, then low quality surgeons will likely lose their business altogether, because of the patient’s inability to protect themselves from possible malpractice. Perhaps this case can teach both doctors and patients a lesson.

Free Legal Advice: Medical Malpractice