Pharmacy Error Injury Lawyer Blog

Patient Death During California Nurse Strike Possibly Due to Medication Error

September 28, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

A patient at Alta Bates Summit Medical Center in San Francisco, California died over the weekend, allegedly due to an incorrect medication dosage from a replacement nurse. About 23,000 nurses across California went on strike on Thursday, September 22, 2011 due to a dispute between the nurses’ union and the healthcare network that runs Alta Bates and other hospitals. The strike was meant to last one day, but the nurses found themselves locked out when they tried to return to work Friday. The lockout continued through the weekend. The hospital brought in replacement nursing staff to cover the shifts for the union nurses.

The patient was a 66 year-old Oakland resident who had been receiving treatment at Alta Bates since July 2011. Preliminary findings indicate that her death resulted from the wrong dosage of a medication, which was administered by one of the replacement nurses.

The nurses’ union, the California Nursing Association, has questioned the qualifications of the replacement nursing staff. The American Nurses Association, which represents nurses nationwide, allows nurses to strike if the intent is to advocate for changes in hospitals to benefit patient health. The ANA’s ethics rules requires nurses going on strike to provide advance notice of their plans and to take steps to minimize any potential harm to patients. The purpose of Thursday’s strike was to protest contract concessions demanded by the healthcare network that, according to the union, would negatively affect patient safety.

Hospital officials have defended the replacement nursing staff, saying that they are all highly experienced, and that the hospital “did not skimp on any of the nurses.” While the question of liability and “fault” may take some time to resolve, this incident clearly demonstrates the difficulties inherent in patient safety in hospitals, especially where medications are concerned. A hospital mired in confusion carries a great risk of pharmacy errors.

This Pharmacy Error Injury Blog has previously noted the high rate of risks for medication errors in hospitals despite efforts at accountability among doctors and nurses. This incident in San Francisco demonstrates a phenomenon noted by a recent study from Johns Hopkins, which found an increased risk of medication errors in hospitals that use temporary doctors and nursing staff. The study concluded that a lack of familiarity with a particular hospital’s systems and procedures among temporary staff can lead to an increased number of medication errors.

“Good Catch” Program Hopes to Encourage the Reporting of Pharmacy Errors Before They Occur

September 20, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

A system developed at Johns Hopkins Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland intends to prevent accidents before they happen by encouraging clinicians to report situations that might lead to dangerous or even life-threatening incidents for patients. Known as the “Good Catch Awards,” the program distributed 27 honors in its first two years for reports that led to positive changes in patient safety. Such changes ranged from modifications in pharmacy order sheets to a national recall of improperly-labeled drugs.

The “Good Catch” program operates on the theory that, instead of errors being attributable to one individual, most errors result from a flawed system in a hospital. It stresses to doctors and other medical practitioners that its purpose is to find solutions to common errors, not to assign blame for those errors. Not all doctors and others have embraced the system yet, but most acknowledge that it is a vast improvement over safety systems at most hospitals. Robert Stoelting, MD, president of the Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation, compared the system to those used in nuclear plants and airlines, where the responsibility for safety is shared by everyone. He suggests the creation of a national database to collect hospitals’ self-reports of “errors and so-called near misses” in order to better share safety information and create greater opportunities to improve patient safety.

Other hospitals have implemented their own “Good Catch” programs, inviting clinicians to share examples of near misses that could have resulted in patient injury but did not. The University of Connecticut Health Center offers a “Good Catch” award for near misses that lead to improvements in patient care. The Minnesota Hospital Association awards a “Good Catch for Patient Safety Award” to clinicians “who demonstrate their commitment to keeping patients safe by ‘speaking up’ to prevent potential harm to a patient.” The Brantford Community Healthcare System in Brantford, Ontario, Canada solicits stories from its medical staff about incidents that contribute to its “culture of safety.”

Hospital Patients are Subject to an Average of One Medication Error per Day

September 14, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

A report from the Institute of Medicine finds that hospital patients in the U.S., on average, experience one medication error per day. Errors may include incorrect dosages, administering a drug with the incorrect method, or administering the wrong drug altogether. Some errors involve prescription of a drug with incomplete information about a patient’s health history or allergies, leading to harmful reactions. Researchers also found instances of errors in which doctors and nurses did not have up-to-date information on the drugs they were prescribing and therefore did not know of newly-discovered risks. The report found a hospital medication error rate of eleven percent in its study and estimated that hospital patients receive an average of ten medication dosages each day.

Current estimates place the total number of annual deaths due to hospital medical errors at 7,000, and the total number of injuries at 1.3 million. Research shows that medication errors can lead to extensions of hospital stays of 8 to 12 days on average, leading to additional costs of $16,000 to $24,000 for the patients. Studies have found medication errors to occur in up to 3.7 percent of all hospitalizations. The total cost of injuries and deaths due to medication errors could be as high as $5.6 million per year per hospital.

Researchers have proposed many possible reasons for the number of medication errors known to occur. A 2002 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association linked a patient’s chancing of dying during routine hospital procedures to lower nurse-to-patient ratios, finding that the risk decreased as the number of patients assigned to each nurse in a hospital decreased. A recent study from Johns Hopkins University found a connection between medication errors and widespread use of temporary staff, including temporary doctors and nurses, in hospital emergency rooms. Johns Hopkins researchers concluded that errors may result from temporary staff’s lack of familiarity with a particular hospital’s systems and procedures. A 2006 study from the University of California at San Diego found a ten percent increase in fatal medication errors in area with teaching hospitals during the month of July. July is the month when medical school graduates first report to teaching hospitals. The study seems to confirm anecdotal evidence of the “July Effect,” where injuries and deaths in hospitals allegedly spike during the summer months.

Regardless of the conditions of hospital facilities or staff, hospitals, doctors and nurses have a duty of care to their patients to provide competent service, and this includes taking care to ensure correct prescription, dosage, and administration of medications. The fast-paced and often overcrowded nature of many hospitals creates a risk of error, and while a patient should certainly exercise diligence in monitoring their own treatment and medication as much as possible, the responsibility mainly lies with the nurses and doctors and the hospitals that employ them.

Fosamax Lawsuit in New York May Proceed, but With Limitations

September 8, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

A New York federal judge is allowing a lawsuit over the osteoporosis drug Fosamax to go forward, but with limitations. Judge John Keenan will allow plaintiff Linda Secrest to pursue her claim against Merck & Co., but she will not be able to claim punitive damages or to argue that Merck failed to warn her about potential risks in taking the drug. Secrest claims that a defect in Fosamax caused osteonecrosis of the jaw (“ONJ”), a condition in which the tissue in her jaw decayed. Secrest’s lawsuit is the fourth bellwether case against Merck over Fosamax, and the outcome will affect thousands of other Fosamax claims. Significantly, Judge Keenan stated in his decision that he found no evidence that any warning label would have caused Secrest’s prescribing physician to take her off the medication.

Fosamax, or its generic equivalent alendronate, treats and prevents osteoporosis, a condition in which the bones weaken and can easily break. It first came on the market in 1995. The drug works by inhibiting bone resorption, the process by which bones break down with age. Doctors often prescribe the drug for women who have gone through menopause.

The FDA began to collect reports of ONJ as far back as 2000, and other complaints such as broken legs began to come in as well. A 2008 finding from the FDA indicated a possible link between the drug and certain cases of esophageal cancer. A report from the American Dental Association followed soon after that suggested a connection between ONJ and medications in the same class as Fosamax. A 2010 press release from the FDA warned of a possible elevated risk of thigh bone fractures. These correlations led quickly to litigation.

Secrest’s lawsuit began in Florida, and in August 2006 it moved to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to be consolidated with other similar lawsuits. Secrest, along with dozens more plaintiffs around the country, filed suit against Merck, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Procter & Gamble Pharmaceuticals, Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi-Aventis, Walgreen Co. and Mouhannad Budeir DDS. The lawsuit, styled In Re: Fosamax Products Liability Litigation, seeks tort damages for personal injury and products liability. Three bellwether cases preceded Secrest’s case. Merck one two of those cases at trial, and the third resulted in am $8 million jury verdict against Merck, which Judge Keenan reduced to $1.5 million.

Reducing Medication Error Injury by Keeping Health Record Journals

August 30, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Our Prince George’s County, Maryland pharmacy error lawyer blog recently reported on the important role communication plays between patients and their healthcare providers—in order to reduce the risk of medication errors or pharmacy misfills, and to promote the safe and effective use of drug therapy.

Every year, 1.5 million Americans experience medication-related injuries, according to a study by the Institute of Medicine. In order to prevent medication errors, the American Pharmacists Association (APhA) reports that it is important for patients to keep accurate health records with them when visiting the doctor and pharmacist, including current prescription medication lists detailing the dosage information along with all health conditions that the medication is treating.

Patient medication lists can reduce the risk of pharmacy misfills, incorrect dosages, medication duplication, allergy interaction, and any harmful side effects from potential dangerous drug interactions. The APhA also states that by keeping drug lists with them at all times, patients can prevent medical error by providing emergency staff and hospital pharmacists with important information that could saves lives in an emergency.

According to a recent Chicago Tribune article, doctors are now recommending that individuals turn the medication lists into a comprehensive health journal, to keep healthcare providers informed and to prevent medication error injury.

Report Finds Medication Errors in Chronic Drug Therapy After Seniors Leave Hospitals

August 29, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

According to a recent study discussed in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), that our Baltimore medication error lawyers have been following, hospitalized patients are more likely to have medication errors than non-hospitalized patients—when drugs used to treat chronic conditions are unintentionally discontinued in hospitals, especially if the patients are in a hospital’s intensive care unit.

The study reportedly showed that transitions in healthcare can increase a patient’s chances for medical errors that stem from inaccurate or incomplete communication between the hospital staff, the primary care physician, and the patient—causing an interruption or discontinuation of medications that aim to help treat patients’ chronic diseases on a long term basis.

According to the authors, the problem of medication errors and the unintentional discontinuation of drugs can happen during hospital stays, transfers and discharge. Treatment in intensive care units can also increase the risk of medication errors of omission as the healthcare providers are focused on emergency care and may engage in the practice of discontinuing a medication used for chronic illnesses during a time of critical illness.

The medication error study followed nearly 400,000 patients who were older than 65, and who had over one year of experience continuously taking one of the following five drug classes: respiratory inhalers, gastric acid suppressors, statins, anticoagulant or antiplatelet agents, and levothyroxine, used to treat the thyroid gland.

Medical Error Leaves Judge with Surgical Sponge in Body

August 25, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Our Baltimore medication error injury blog recently reported that according to the Institute of Medicine, 1.5 million medication error injuries occur every year around the country that are preventable, and as many as 98,000 deaths due to medical errors.

When Nelson Bailey decided to have elective surgery for diverticulitis, a condition causing him abdominal discomfort, he was told that he would be out of the Good Samaritan Medical Center in around four days. What Bailey didn’t expect, according to a recent article in the Sun Sentinel, was that he would suffer from two different and equally serious medical errors at the hospital that would change his live completely.

Bailey, a Palm Beach County judge, underwent the intestinal surgery in October 2009, where the surgeon made a medical error by mistakenly leaving a surgical sponge inside Bailey’s body—that was reportedly as big as a washcloth, and was left to fester for five months.

When Bailey was recovering from surgery he then experienced a hospital pharmacy error, after the pharmacy prepared the incorrect medication. The doctor had reportedly ordered blood pressure lowering medication, but when the wrong medication was sent from the pharmacy, the nurse gave him the drug without double checking the drug label.

New Palm-Vein Scanning Technology Introduced to Reduce Medical Errors in Hospitals

August 22, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Our Hartford County, Maryland pharmacy error injury attorneys have been following the latest healthcare technology introduced by New York University’s Langone Medical Center, in an effort to reduce the amount of time it takes to check patients in to the hospital, and to eliminate medical errors.

As our lawyers have discussed in a previous Maryland medication error injury blog, according the Institute of Medicine, there are 1.5 million medication error injuries every year that are preventable, and as many as 98,000 deaths due to medical errors.

The new biometric technology aimed to improve patient safety is made by Fujitsu, the technology services company, and works with the concept that like fingerprints, every patient has an individual and unique palm-vein configuration. The technology uses near-infrared waves to take an image of a patient’s palm veins, which the software then links to that patient’s medical records in about a minute. Other reported benefits of the technology is that a patient does not have to be conscious during the check-in process, and the system eliminates the need for a patient to fill out any forms, unless the patient’s insurance has changed since the last palm scan.

The hospital reportedly experiences around 1.7 million patient visits per year, and is in the process of converting as many patients as possible to the new palm scanning system, to prevent medical errors and patient injury. Since 250 scanners were installed in June, over 25,000 patients have received palm-vein scans that have been registered in the system. The palm scan does not appear in the patient’s medical records, and it is not stored as an image. After the palm is scanned, the image is converted into special numeric code.

WHO Claims Hospitals Are More Dangerous Than Airline Travel

August 18, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

According to a recent report in Medical News Today that our Baltimore medical error injury attorneys have been following, Professor Sir Liam Donaldson has been appointed as the new Envoy for Patient Safety for the World Health Organization (WHO). Donaldson recently stated, in an effort to highlight the fact that healthcare safety around the world needs to be improved, that going to the hospital is far more dangerous than flying on an airplane, as the WHO reports that millions of people die annually from medical errors associated with healthcare—far more, according to Donaldson, than accidents on planes.

In his striking comparison, Donaldson claimed that if a patient entered the hospital he would have a 1 in 10 chance of experiencing a medical error, with the chances of wrongful death due to medical error being 1 in 300. Donaldson then stated that in comparison, the risk of dying in a plane crash is far less—approximately 1 in 10 million.

Donaldson reportedly stated that in an effort to reduce the growing number of hospital related infections resulting in patient injury or harm that happen every year, patients need to ask questions and make sure that hospitals maintain the basic hygiene standards and conform to the WHO’s healthcare checklist to prevent medical error or patient illness or injury during surgical procedures.

According to the WHO statistics, 7 in 100 patients in the hospitals throughout developed countries experience infections linked to healthcare, whereas in developing countries this number increases to 10 patients in every 100. The risk of infection is directly tied to the length of time a patient stays in the hospital’s intensive care unit. The WHO figures show that risk of infection is lower in the United States than in Europe, but the death from hospital-acquired infection is higher. In the United States, 1.7 million hospital acquired infections reportedly happen every year, resulting in 100,000 deaths, and in Europe, 4.5 million hospital acquired infections happen every year, resulting in around 37,000 deaths.

The Benefits and Problems of Electronic Medical Records Systems

August 10, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

In a recent Baltimore County pharmacy misfill injury blog, our attorneys discussed a tragic medical error that caused the death of an premature infant, after a pharmacy technician accidentally entered the wrong information into the computer, causing the intravenous solution prepared buy an automated machine to contain a lethal dose of sodium chloride. This pharmacy error has reportedly brought the issue of electronic medical health records safety concerns back into the forefront of patient safety.

As our attorneys have reported in a related Hartford County medication error injury blog, the medical industry is shifting toward electronic medical records and computerized systems that make medical processes and prescription orders automatic, in an effort to reduce pharmacy error injury or wrongful death.

The Chicago Tribune reports that the federal government is also currently helping the digital shift by giving $23 billion in incentives to healthcare providers who purchase the electronic systems, with the hopes that these medical technologies will help increase access to patients’ medical information, help healthcare providers communicate better with each other, help doctors to see test results more quickly, and implement electronic safeguards to remind doctors about recommended medical practices, or to alert them about harmful drug interactions before prescribing.

With all of the benefits that come with electronic medical records and computerized systems, potential problems are also taking place, like crashing of hospital computers, or software bugs that interfere with important data, or even delete information from computerized records. Computerized systems also reportedly can produce data about patients that is disorganized or difficult to read, especially when a doctor is quickly looking for critical patient information.