Doctors Making Diagnoses By Proxy
AppId is over the quota
It's actually quite possible that your disability case will be determined by something a doctor you've never even met has to say. IMEs generally don't meet or examine the people who they're asked to assess. Instead, they review the files you've sent to the insurance company and, once in a blue moon, speak to your treating physicians. It's no wonder why they do it. It's difficult to get doctors and patients together over great distances, it lessens the possibility of a plaintiff unduly affecting or trying to embellish results (which they can tell), and it depersonalizes the process so they don't have to feel bad about denying benefits to people they like and feel sorry for.
But in this case they go beyond that. They don't even contact the treating physicians, those who have medical knowledge and know the facts of the case the best. Of course they're going to deny benefits if all they're doing is reading a piece of paper. They can come up with hundreds of excuses to discredit written words because words can't argue back like another doctor can. Not contacting treating physicians, or trying to contact them when they know they'll be unavailable (i.e. around lunchtime), simply makes the IME's job easier and it's no shock that it's incredibly common in this industry of the underhanded.
In the case of Schully v. Continental Casualty Company this was exactly the case. Click the link to read a news blurb followed by a press release and the entire opinion on the case involving IMEs and their diagnoses by proxy .
Message:
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.
For security purposes, please enter the graphic text in the box below: [hit F5 if you can not read the text]
Medical Malpractice Concerns Rise When Pain Management Diagnoses Fail
AppId is over the quota
Missed or delayed pain management diagnoses create a serious risk for hospital patients. Today’s Hospitalist found that nurses, doctors, and support staff frequently failed at communicating dosing amounts, did not conduct appropriate monitoring, and struggled to communicate effectively with each other.
These mistakes play a huge role in causing serious injuries and wrongful deaths in hospitals nationwide. Today’s Hospitalist found that 11 percent of claims brought against hospitals involved pain medicine and management practices. Medical professionals must be cognizant of the fact that most patients enter the hospital already on numerous medications. A full medical history and physical examination are critical before administering new medicines. In instances where a patient is not able to give his or her history, hospitalists should reach out to the patient’s family, pharmacy, or insurer to gather all the prescription information the patient is using.
One area of critical concern is with written prescriptions. The study showed that many hospitalists wrote orders for a dose range instead of an exact dosage and time interval. This is especially problematic when narcotics and sedatives are being used to alleviate pain symptoms given their propensity to cause respiratory depression and respiratory arrest. Hospitals should have guidelines when prescribing multiple narcotics and sedatives to prevent fatal events. And when numerous, powerful medicines are being used, hospitalists need to check on patients every hour to check their respiration, pain, and sedation levels.
A case history that Today’s Hospitalist looked at involved a patient who died after excess dosages of Dilaudid, a narcotic pain medication. As the investigation into the incident followed, it was discovered that a range of pain medication was given instead of precise directions. The nurse spoke to the doctor after the patient’s pain was still at a level 10 after many hours. The doctor was harsh in his responses with the nurse, which ultimately resulted in the patient receiving the equivalent of 88 mg of morphine along with Demerol and Valium. When the nurse gave the last dose to the patient, the doctor stopped by the hospital room but decided not to disturb the patient as he was finally not feeling pain.
Everyone involved should have given more time to the patient and his safety. Nurse and doctor communication should have been more open than tense; dosage directions should have been explicit; and the patient should have been monitored more closely. Medical professionals cannot lose sight of delivering quality care to each patient. Hospitalists owe this duty to their patients, even when they are managing numerous patients and critical care situations. Pain management protocols must be in effect to provide clinicians with checks and balances in these situations, especially when they hand off the patient to the next nurse and hospitalist on duty.
When an individual or their loved one suffers injuries or a wrongful death from a hospitalist’s missed or delayed pain management diagnoses, they should promptly seek legal action. In Illinois, the Chicago medical malpractice attorney Paul A. Greenberg, Esq. will go after the liable individual and hospital to rectify the wrongdoing. The law firm of Briskman Briskman & Greenberg has helped clients for decades as they seek compensation for their pain and suffering, medical bills, and related costs. As successful Chicago medical malpractice lawyers, the team will uphold your rights when your health has been compromised or neglected. To learn more, visit http://www.briskmanandbriskman.com or call 877-595-HURT (4878).
Briskman Briskman & Greenberg
351 West Hubbard Street, Ste 810
Chicago, IL 60654
Paul Greenberg is a Chicago medical malpractice lawyer and Chicago medical malpractice attorney with Briskman Briskman & Greenberg. To learn more call 1.877.595.4878 or visit http://www.briskmanandbriskman.com/.
Doctors make diagnoses from the proxy
But in this case, they go about it. You, not even doctors, contact those who have the medical knowledge and know the facts of the case the best. Of course they want benefits to refuse, if all they do is reading a piece of paper. You can use hundreds of excuses, written words to discredit, because words can still argue like an other doctor can not arise. Doctors from contacting, or to try to contact, if they know that she not available (i.e. at noon), simply makes the IME job easier, and it's no shock that it is incredibly common in this industry from the treacherous.
In Schully v. Continental Casualty Company, this was exactly the case. Click on the link to read a news blurb, followed by a press release and the entire opinion on the case with IMEs and their Diagnostics by the proxy.
Message:
Notify me of follow up comments via e-Mail.
Off for security reasons, enter the image text in the box below: [press F5 when you can't read the text]
Podiatry soon in a position to make diagnoses! Could not she before?
"So far" da VA General Assembly is finally ready to pass a law that changes the diagnosis include the definition of podiatry, Podiatry liberation a cause foot or ankle injury of witness. I suppose that it makes sense that a DPM (a foot and ankle experts) now officially a foot/ankle diagnosis can make.
The law limited orthopaedic surgeon, as well. Podiatry now won't be able to testify against MD in medical malpractice cases. Basically, this means that only MDs can testify against MDs during MD and DPMs can testify both against podiatrists.
The recent Supreme Court of Virginia case Hollingsworth v. Norfolk Southern, provides the standing of foot specialists and their testimony into question and brings attention to the change.po pending General Assembly
One comment to "Podiatry soon in a position to make diagnoses!" "Could not before?"
Message:
Notify me of follow up comments via e-Mail.
Off for security reasons, enter the image text in the box below: [press F5 when you can't read the text]
Doctors make diagnoses from the proxy
But in this case, they go in. You contact not even doctors, those, that medical knowledge and know, the facts of the case the best. Of course, they want to deny benefits if all they do is that read a piece of paper. You can use hundreds of excuses, written words to discredit, because words can still argue like an other doctor can not arise. Doctors not contact, or to try, to contact if they know that she not available (i.e. at noon), facilitates the IME job easy and it's no shock that it is incredibly common in this industry from the underhanded.
In Schully v. Continental Casualty Company, this was exactly the case. Click on the link to a news blurb followed by a press release and the entire opinion on the case with IMEs and read their diagnoses of the proxy.
Message:
Notify me of follow up comments via e-Mail.
For security purposes, you give the graphic text in the box below: [press F5 if you can't read the text]
