ED Legal Letter – May 1, 2018
May 1, 2018
View Issues
-
Court Applies EMTALA to Hospital’s Urgent/Walk-in Care Center
A Rhode Island federal court determined that under the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act regulations, a walk-in urgent care center was a “dedicated emergency department” because it held itself out “as a place that provides care for emergency medical conditions on an urgent basis without requiring a previously scheduled appointment.”
-
Case Law Expanding ED’s Legal Exposure if Discharged Psychiatric Patient Commits Violence
Healthcare providers’ liability exposure for potentially violent ED patients could be expanding nationally.
-
Lack of Discussion With Supervising EP Key Focus of PA Lawsuits
"An emergency physician who has agreed to supervise a PA may be sued, even when she never saw the patient, never reviewed the record, and does not remember the patient," one expert warns.
-
Tissue Plasminogen Activator Decision Remains Legal Landmine for EDs
Most lawsuits involving tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) allege the EP failed to give the drug, or that the drug wasn’t given quickly enough. In reality, a minority of stroke patients receive tPA. Almost all are outside the treatment window or don’t meet the criteria for another reason.
-
Hospitals Face Liability if Impaired EP Becomes Malpractice Defendant
Experts discuss some ways plaintiff’s attorneys keep the hospital in the litigation against the EP and offer tips for reducing risks.
-
Disappointing Stroke Outcome? Patient ‘Likely to Blame EP’
A look at several common issues concerning ED malpractice claims involving stroke patients.