Skip to main content

All Access Subscription

Get unlimited access to our full publication and article library.

Get Access Now

Interested in Group Sales? Learn more

Healthcare Risk Management

RSS  

Articles

  • Failure to Screen for Cancer, Hepatitis C Leads to $2.7 Million Verdict

    This case illustrates the importance of risk factors in setting the standard of care for medical screenings and testing. Discussing a patient’s history and background, including the patient’s family medical history, is important for a physician to determine the applicable standard of care.
  • Latest Leapfrog Safety Grades Include Post-Op Sepsis

    The most recent grades from The Leapfrog Group represent the largest set of hospitals ever evaluated, with grades assigned to 2,901 facilities. More than 30 evidence-based measures of patient safety were assessed, including postoperative sepsis, blood leakage, and kidney injury for the first time.
  • Recruitment Agreements Run Risk of Stark Law Violations

    Hospitals may enter into recruitment agreements to bring needed physicians into the community. However, serious legal issues can arise related to the Stark Law, which prohibits making referrals involving a compensation arrangement or investment interests.
  • Cyberattacks Increasing Since Pandemic Began

    Since the beginning of the pandemic, the healthcare industry has seen a significant rise in cyberattacks. The combination of the pandemic’s effects — crowded facilities, expanded telehealth usage, exhausted workers — with more reliance on medical devices has left the industry vulnerable to cybercriminals.
  • Contact Manufacturer When Medical Device Is Compromised

    The response plan for a compromised medical device should include contacting the device manufacturer. The security of medical devices should be addressed from the time the medical provider contracts to purchase the device. Obtain information from the manufacturer regarding the security of the device, such as the Manufacturer Disclosure Statement for Medical Device Security.
  • Prepare Now for Critical Device Security Incidents

    Hospitals and health systems are increasingly dependent on sophisticated medical devices for patient care and maintaining safety, but not all are ready to respond effectively when hackers access those devices. Risk managers should ensure an effective response plan is in place that is well practiced and ready to deploy at a moment’s notice.
  • Evidence Shows Apology Laws Are Largely Ineffective

    What was once a nagging suspicion is becoming established fact. There is growing evidence demonstrating the “apology laws” enacted by most states to protect clinicians after adverse events have little positive effect. These apologies might even encourage patients to sue, and they can work against a defendant during trial.
  • HIPAA Relevance to COVID-19 Vaccinations Can Be Misunderstood

    Employees and employers frequently believe HIPAA comes into play when asking about an individual’s vaccination status. It almost always does not. Although some states are considering legislation designating vaccination status as a separate protected class, private employers generally are free to ask employees about their vaccination status without running afoul of HIPAA or federal employment laws.
  • HIPAA Changes Coming in 2022 Might Require Policy Revisions

    Proposed changes to HIPAA and HITECH may affect covered entities and business associates in 2022. Now is the time to consider any effects, and respond accordingly. The modifications could require updates to policies and procedures, notices of privacy practices, forms, business associate agreements, and other HIPAA-related compliance issues.
  • Birth Injury Suit Defense Verdict Upheld in Favor of Physician and Practice Group

    Lessons from this case on the law may be unique to this state, but it demonstrates the importance of reviewing a physician or care provider’s applicable laws for any such special protections. In a different state, the outcome here could have been dramatically different: The physician was negligent and the patient was injured, which could have resulted in a jury awarding millions of dollars for lifelong injuries requiring ongoing medical care. But here, the negligent physician was protected by the state law.