New York Personal Injury Law Blog: NYC To Put Hospital Error Data Online

Eric Turkewitz, The Turkewitz Law Firm, New York, NY  

Friday, September 7, 2007

 

NYC To Put Hospital Error Data Online

The New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, which runs 11 city-owned hospitals, will start today to put data online on infection and death rates. The hospitals treat 1.3 million patients a year.

According to an article in the Metro section of today's New York Times, the effort for greater transparency is driven by Mayor Michael Bloomberg as part of a public health initiative. It also comes due to an effort by the hospitals to improve patient safety. (See also, New York City Reports Lowest Number of Claims In 10 Years.)

This web site will allow the public to see, among other things, the overall death rate, the rate of deaths after heart attacks, preventable bloodstream infections and pneumonia cases.

The medical industry is not exactly known for its transparency when it comes to medical errors and poor outcomes. Which seems to put this initiative near the forefront of identifying, and hopefully treating, systemic problems within the institutions that have led to incalculable misery, death and medical malpractice lawsuits.

This initiative comes on the heels of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention projecting that 1.7 million patients nationwide get infections each year during a hospital stay, and that of those, 99,000 would die. The centers estimate the cost of treating such infections at more than $30 billion a year.

It also comes on the heels of Medicare refusing to pay for the treatment of avoidable infections and other hospital-caused injuries. According to a Jacob Goldstein WSJ Health Blog posting earlier this week, with money on the line, hospitals have already responded by changing policies for the better.

All of which leads one to wonder: Is there a hospital health care revolution taking place?


More info at: The Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths

Labels:


Comments:
Eric:
Does the name Christopher Reeve ring a bell? I know you are a plantiff attorney and hence have little interest in the truth, rather a W in your column, but the fact is that bed sores and MRSA infections are not necessarily preventable (depending on the circumstances). Have you ever heard of community aquired MRSA? Have you ever taken care of a para or a quad? Do you understand what I am talking about?
 
No, I don't understand what you are talking about, since I never said that all bed sores were preventable.

I did, however, in discussing Medicare's decision to cut off money for treatment, indicate that the proposition "could be subject to debate." If you click on the link above regarding Medicare, it will take you to my comments on the subject.

With respect to MRSA, I wrote in one of my very first posts as a blogger, that "many of these infections and deaths are preventable."

Hospitals Are Not Healthy

Do you disagree with that?
 
Eric your words:

"Medicare refusing to pay for the treatment of avoidable infections and other hospital-caused injuries"

Please do differentiate between a "hospital aquired bedsore" and one that is not. Please do differentiate between a "community aquired" MRSA and a hospital aquired MRSA. This is the fact. I take care (have taken care of) both para's/quad's/and the elderly bedbound. The best care in the world cannot prevent pressure ulcers in some of these cases. I have taken care of ulcer's/cellulitis that turned out to be MRSA in people who have never set foot in a hospital (not a rare occurence by the way). Can hospitals do better...yes. But turning cases which may OR MAY NOT be hospital aquired into immediately ASSUMED hospital aquired is not the answer. The fact is by turning these cases into "never" events by bureaucrats who wouldn't know a pressure ulcer from a peptic ulcer shows a total lack of understanding of pathophysiology of disease processes and also the biology of infectious disease, resistence, and selection pressures associated with antibiotic use (and misuse). All medicare, Bush, and yourself have shown is you have no understanding of medicine.
 
Please do differentiate between a "hospital aquired bedsore" and one that is not. Please do differentiate between a "community aquired" MRSA and a hospital aquired MRSA.

This, apparently, is what Medicare is asking you to do. And why I said it would raise issues with the medical community.

All medicare, Bush, and yourself have shown is you have no understanding of medicine.

I think you have confused me with Medicare. All I did was point out the news story and raise the issue of why it may well be a problem. And it appears you agree with me.

--ET
 
Regarding Eric's comment, if you examine the circumstances leading to Mr. Reeve's dying from a single bedsore, you would have to conclude that there was a failure to provide proper nursing care. The idea of unavoidable pressure ulcers is a story told by those who fail to relieve pressure. Obviously some patients are more challenging than others and it is a daunting task, but with a combination of good old fashioned nursing care and technology there should never be stage IV craters so big you could put fist in it; not to mention the foul stench of rotting flesh. You show me a case like that and I will show you negligence every time.
 
Post a Comment



Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

 


The New York Personal Injury Law Blog is sponsored by its creator, Eric Turkewitz of The Turkewitz Law Firm. The blog might be considered a form of attorney advertising in accordance with New York rules going into effect February 1, 2007 (22 NYCRR 1200.1, et. seq.) As of July 14, 2008, Law.com became an advertiser, as you can see in the sidebar. Law.com does not control the editorial content of the blog in any way.

Throughout the blog as it develops, you may see examples of cases we have handled, or cases from others, that are used for illustrative purposes. Since all cases are different, and legal authority may change from year to year, it is important to remember that prior results in any particular case do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes with respect to any future matter, including yours, in which any lawyer or law firm may be retained.

Some of the commentary may be become outdated. Some might be a minority opinion, or simply wrong. No reader should consider this site (or any other) to be authoritative, and if a legal issue is presented, the reader should contact an attorney of his or her own choosing for advice.

Finally, we are not responsible for the comments of others that may be added to this site.

 

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?