Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

As a medical malpractice lawyer in Chicago, I am intrigued by the following story. Most generic medicines are tested on adults, but may have very different effects in children or elderly patients, so it is important to consider how bodies of drastically different ages may respond to the same medicines.

A recent study reveals interesting information about children and painkillers. The AP reports on a “surprising study” that found “kids with a broken arm do better on a simple over-the-counter painkiller than on a more powerful prescription combination that includes a narcotic” (Marilynn Marchione, FindLaw News citing to the Annals of Emergency Medicine, 8/18).

The study “tested ibuprofen, sold as Advil, Motrin and other brands, against acetaminophen plus codeine - a combo called Tylenol No. 3 that is also sold in generic form,” and found that the children who took ibuprofen did better because “they were more likely to play, they ate better and had fewer adverse effects,” according to the study leader, Dr. Amy Drendel of the Medical College of Wisconsin.

Experts praised the study for testing drugs in children, since to date many painkillers have only been tested on adults but used in practice on children. The study tested only the first three days after a broken arm, so does not imply that ibuprofen is always better than stronger painkillers, but since “one in five kids will break a bone before age 10,” the findings have daily implications.

The AP reports, “six more cases have been found of cancer patients being given incorrect radiation doses at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Philadelphia” (FindLaw News citing to the Philadelphia Inquirer, 8/18). These errors occurred during a common surgical procedure to treat prostate cancer. The treatment involves placing radioactive seeds in the prostate to kill cancer cells. Most patients received “far less than the prescribed dose while others received too much,” and some even ended up with radioactive seeds in places other than the prostate.

Unfortunately, the six additional cases bring the total to “98 veterans who were given incorrect radiation doses over a six-year period at the hospital.” Considering that “the program had treated 114 cancer patients before it was halted when the problem surfaced in 2008,” the number of botched procedures is huge.

As a medical malpractice lawyer, I am continually outraged as this story unfolds as the amount of negligent medical care that occurred before shutting down the program is far beyond unacceptable. Repeated mistakes in this facility have plagued the lives of many of our veterans and their families with tragedy.

As a medical malpractice lawyer, I am upset by the following story and believe that this is just another example of why medical device safety needs to be evaluated more thoroughly.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (7/31, Poole) reports, several plaintiffs are "suing the maker of a medical device used to treat pelvic organ prolapse, alleging the product caused them serious injury." The suit, filed against CR Bard Inc., alleges, "Among other things, that the company made a defective device -- the Avalia Plus Anterior BioSynthetic Support System -- and seeks unspecified damages."

The plaintiffs claim that "as a result of having the Bard products implanted in them...they have experienced 'significant mental and physical pain and suffering and have sustained permanent injury and substantial physical deformity."

Hurley, McKenna & Mertz in Chicago has represented hundred of clients with similar medical injuries. If you or someone you know has suffered a medical injury, you should seek legal advice immediately. Call (312) 553-4900 for a free consultation.

As a medical malpractice lawyer, I am disappointed that many young doctors are not being trained to obtain adequate informed consent. Informed consent is a necessary part of every medical procedure, and every patient should make sure they are aware of the potential benefits and risks of any procedure.

In the New York Times’ (7/30) Doctor and Patient column, Pauline W. Chen, MD, wrote, "while studies on informed consent have historically concentrated on the legal and ethical implications," recent work "represents an emerging research focus that in many ways reflects larger changes in the consent process itself."

She noted that this trend shows "how our ideal of the patient-doctor relationship has over time evolved." According to Dr. Timothy M. Pawlik, an associate professor of surgery at Johns Hopkins University, patients are now treated "as partners in the process, and our informed consent reflects that." He added "for some types of practices...informed consent may be the most important opportunity to strengthen the patient-doctor relationship."

But, "the process by which most doctors learn how to obtain informed consent is usually haphazard at best. Young doctors rarely have formal mentorship or the opportunity to observe more experienced physicians doing the process" leaving them ill prepared to obtain adequate informed consent on their own. As such, medical training should incorporate this important practice.