ED Legal Letter
RSSArticles
-
EP Failed to Obtain Consult? ED Malpractice Claims Can Include This Allegation
It turns out that a significant number of ED claims involve this scenario — about one in five, according to an analysis of closed malpractice claims. These are some relevant case examples.
-
‘Very Scary’ Legal Ramifications for Hospitals if ED Clinician Diverts Drugs
If ED nurses or physicians are diverting drugs, a state board investigation, malpractice lawsuit, or both are possible. The hospital also could be legally exposed.
-
ED Patient 'Drunk, Disheveled, Foul-Smelling,' According to Medical Record
Healthcare workers should avoid angry charting. Judgmental or insulting statements about patients and coworkers can come back to haunt a physician or nurse in litigation.
-
EPs Facing Litigation Need Support
Many EPs who find themselves defendants question their own skills and experience anger and depression.
-
Multiple Defendants in ED Claim? Often, Conflicts Are Inevitable
Many ED malpractice claims include multiple defendants. Each defendant has unique (and sometimes competing) interests.
-
Anticoagulant Misadventures Give Rise to Malpractice Claims
Allegations in ED malpractice claims involving anticoagulants can include improper administration, improper withholding, and failure to continue the drug during hospitalization.
-
Negligent Credentialing Puts Hospital on Hook in ED Claim
Negligent credentialing is a way to bring the hospital into malpractice litigation against an EP. It also circumvents state damage caps in some cases.
-
Most ED Med/Mal Claims Include Diagnostic Error; Many Result in Permanent Injuries, Death
About one-third of malpractice allegations in the ED resulted in permanent injuries. Of those cases, 38% involved grave injury or death, according to the authors of a recent analysis of 1,362 closed medical professional liability claims from 2014 to 2018.
-
Reader Survey Available
We’d love to hear from you how we can do better!
-
Just Apologizing Not Enough for EDs to Reduce Malpractice Risk
Apology laws enacted by 39 states and the District of Columbia make apologies inadmissible as evidence in subsequent malpractice trials. The laws are based on the assumption that patients who receive apologies will not be as likely to take legal action. Researchers analyzed claims from a national malpractice insurer over an eight-year period and concluded that apology laws are not doing what they purport.