Vascular surgery-related violations of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act.

OBJECTIVE: The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) is a federal law established in 1986 to ensure that patients who present to an emergency department receive medical care regardless of means. Violations are reported to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and can result in significant financial penalties. Our objective was to assess all available EMTALA violations for vascular-related issues. METHODS: EMTALA violations in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services publicly available hospital violations database from 2011 to 2018 were evaluated for vascular-related issues. Details recorded were case type, hospital type, hospital region, reasons for violation, disposition, and mortality. RESULTS: There were 7001 patients identified with any EMTALA violation and 98 (1.4%) were deemed vascular related. The majority (82.7%) of EMTALA violations occurred at urban/suburban hospitals. Based on the Association of American Medical Colleges United States region, vascular-related EMTALA violations occurred in the Northeast (7.1%), Southern (56.1%), Central (18.4%), and Western (18.4%) United States. Case types included cerebrovascular (28.6%), aortic related (22.4%; which consisted of ruptured aortic aneurysms [8.2%], aortic dissection [11.2%], and other aortic [3.1%]), vascular trauma (15.3%), venous-thromboembolic (15.3%), peripheral arterial disease (9.2%), dialysis access (5.1%), bowel ischemia (3.1%), and other (1%) cases. Patients were transferred to another facility in 41.8% of cases. The most common reasons for violation were specialty refusal or unavailability (30.6%), inappropriate documentation (29.6%), misdiagnosis (18.4%), poor communication (17.3%), inappropriate triage (13.3%), failure to obtain diagnostic laboratory tests or imaging (12.2%), and ancillary or nursing staff issues (7.1%). The overall mortality was 19.4% and 31.6% died during the index emergency department visit. Vascular conditions associated with death were venous thromboembolism (31.6%), ruptured aortic aneurysm (21.1%), aortic dissection (21.1%), other aortic causes (10.5%), vascular trauma (10.5%), and bowel ischemia (5.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Although the frequency of vascular-related EMTALA violations was low, improvements in communication, awareness of vascular disease among staff, specialty staffing, and the development of referral networks and processes are needed to ensure that patients receive adequate care and that institutions are not placed at undue risk.

Obstetrics, genetics, and litigation.

INTRODUCTION: Claims of medical negligence are universal. Unexpected adverse pregnancy outcome may trigger litigation. Such outcomes, especially with neurodevelopmental sequelae, may be compounded by a genetic disorder, congenital abnormality, or syndrome. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a report of 297 cases in which a pregnancy complication, error, or incident occurred that was followed by progeny with a genetic disorder, congenital abnormality, or syndrome that spawned litigation. The author assessed, opined, and in many cases, testified about causation. RESULTS: Pregnancies complicated by hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy were not infrequently compounded by offspring with a genetic disorder, congenital abnormality, or syndrome. Multiple cases were brought because of missed ultrasound or laboratory diagnoses, or failures in carrier detection. Teratogenic medication prescribed before or during pregnancy invited legal purview. Failure to refer (or confer) for genetic evaluation or counseling in the face of significant risk, occurred repeatedly. Ethical breaches and hubris promptly led to litigation. CONCLUSIONS: Many lessons and recommendations emerge in this report. These include the realization that the vast majority of errors in this series involved at least two caregivers, serial ultrasound studies are important, decreased fetal movements may signal a genetic disorder, congenital abnormality, or syndrome, family history and ethnicity are vital, cognitive biases profoundly affect decision-making. Finally, the simplest of errors have the potential for causing life-long grief.

How can Never Event data be used to reflect or improve hospital safety performance?

The absolute number of Never Events is used by UK regulators to help assess hospital safety performance, without account of hospital workload. We applied funnel plots, as an established means of taking workload into account, to published Never Event data for 151 acute Trusts in NHS England, matched to finished consultant episodes for 3 years, 2017-2020. Trusts with excess event rates should have the most Never Events if absolute number is a valid way to judge performance. The absolute number of Never Events was correlated with workload (r2 = 0.51, p < 0.001), but the five Trusts above the upper 95% confidence limit did not have the highest number of Never Events. However, a limitation to interpretation was that the data were skewed; 12 out of 151 Trusts lay below the lower 95% limit. This skew probably arises because funnel plots pool all Never Events and workload data; whereas, ideally, different Never Events should use as denominator only the relevant workload actions that could cause them. We conclude that the manner in which Never Event data are currently used by regulators, in part to judge or rate hospitals, is mathematically invalid. The focus should shift from identifying 'outlier' hospitals to reducing the overall national mean Never Event rate through shared learning and an integrated system-wide approach.

Experience from a Singapore tertiary hospital with restructuring of a vascular surgery practice in response to national and institutional policies during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Singapore was one of the first countries to be affected by COVID-19, with the index patient diagnosed on January 23, 2020. For 2 weeks in February, we had the highest number of COVID-19 cases behind China. In this article, we summarize the key national and institutional policies that were implemented in response to COVID-19. We also describe in detail, with relevant data, how our vascular surgery practice has changed because of these policies and COVID-19. We show that with a segregated team model, the vascular surgery unit can still function while reducing risk of cross-contamination. We explain the various strategies adopted to reduce outpatient and inpatient volume. We provide a detailed breakdown of the type of vascular surgical cases that were performed during the COVID-19 pandemic and compare it with preceding months. We discuss our operating room and personal protective equipment protocols in managing a COVID-19 patient and share how we continue surgical training amid the pandemic. We also discuss the challenges we might face in the future as COVID-19 regresses.

The relevance of law to patient safety education and training.

John Tingle, Lecturer in Law, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham, discusses how a study of law can enhance a patient safety syllabus.

Patient safety and litigation in the NHS post-COVID-19.

John Tingle, Lecturer in Law, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham, discusses patient safety during the present coronavirus pandemic.

Clinical negligence claims following the COVID-19 pandemic.

John Tingle, Lecturer in Law, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham, discusses how the Courts may view clinical negligence claims brought by families who have lost loved ones during the pandemic.

Leaving Hospital: A Step too Far for Risk-Based Regulation?

Discharges from hospital are internationally recognised as a dangerous time in the care pathway of a patient, posing a risk to both their physical wellbeing and dignity. This article examines the effectiveness of risk-based regulation as a tool to address patient safety incidents linked to the hospital discharge process within the English National Health Service. It examines how the risk of this process is identified, conceptualised, and prioritised amongst the relevant statutory regulators, and argues that the risk is neither uniformly recognised by the statutory regulators within the English NHS, nor sufficiently addressed. Professional regulators in particular appear to have a poor awareness of the risk and their role in addressing it. Until these issues are resolved, patients leaving hospitals will continue to be exposed to patient safety incidents which should be avoidable.

Legal perspectives on black box recording devices in the operating environment.

BACKGROUND: A video and medical data recorder in the operating theatre is possible, but concerns over privacy, data use and litigation have limited widespread implementation. The literature on legal considerations and challenges to overcome, and guidelines related to use of data recording in the surgical environment, are presented in this narrative review. METHODS: A review of PubMed and Embase databases and Cochrane Library was undertaken. International jurisprudence on the topic was searched. Practice recommendations and legal perspectives were acquired based on experience with implementation and use of a video and medical data recorder in the operating theatre. RESULTS: After removing duplicates, 116 citations were retrieved and abstracts screened; 31 articles were assessed for eligibility and 20 papers were finally included. According to the European General Data Protection Regulation and US Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, researchers are required to make sure that personal data collected from patients and healthcare professionals are used fairly and lawfully, for limited and specifically stated purposes, in an adequate and relevant manner, kept safe and secure, and stored for no longer than is absolutely necessary. Data collected for the sole purpose of healthcare quality improvement are not required to be added to the patient's medical record. CONCLUSION: Transparency on the use and purpose of recorded data should be ensured to both staff and patients. The recorded video data do not need to be used as evidence in court if patient medical records are well maintained. Clear legislation on data responsibility is needed to use the medical recorder optimally for quality improvement initiatives.

ANTECEDENTES: Es posible instalar un sistema de video y grabación de datos médicos en el quirófano, pero su implementación se ha visto limitada por las dudas relativas a la privacidad, uso de datos y aspectos de litigio. Estas dudas deberían superarse, motivo por el que en este trabajo se proponen unas guías sobre el uso de sistemas de registro en el ambiente quirúrgico. MÉTODOS: Se realizó una revisión en las bases de datos Pubmed y Embase y de la Biblioteca Cochrane. Se buscó la jurisprudencia internacional sobre el tema. Se establecieron unas recomendaciones prácticas y de las perspectivas legales adquiridas a través de la experiencia de la implementación y el uso de sistemas de video y registro de datos médicos en el quirófano. RESULTADOS: Se obtuvieron 116 referencias, de las que una vez eliminadas las duplicadas (n = 5) y revisados los resumenes, 31 artículos cumplían los criterios de eligibilidad. En el estudio final se incluyeron 20 artículos. De acuerdo con la Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (General Data Protection Regulation, GDRP) y la Ley de Transferencia y Responsabilidad de Seguro Médico (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, HIPAA), los investigadores deben asegurar que los datos personales recopilados pertenecientes a los pacientes y profesionales de la salud se utilicen de manera justa y legal, con fines definidos y bien establecidos, de manera adecuada y relevante, y mantenidos a resguardo y almacenados no más tiempo del estrictamente necesario. No es necesario que los datos recopilados con el único propósito de mejorar la calidad de la atención médica se agreguen a la historia clínica del paciente. CONCLUSIÓN: Se debe asegurar por parte del personal sanitario como del paciente, la transparencia tanto en la utilización como en el objetivo de los datos almacenados. Los datos registrados en video no es necesario que sean usados como evidencia en procesos judiciales si la historia clínica de los pacientes cumple los estandares establecidos. Se precisa una legislación clara sobre la responsabilidad de los datos para la utilización óptima de los registros médicos en las iniciativas de mejora de la calidad.

The changing regulatory landscape for biomedical implants and its relationship to withdrawal of some vaginal mesh products.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Advancements in biomedical engineering and advanced therapies including tissue engineering products necessitate revisions to the regulation and governance of their production and use to ensure patient safety. In this review, the current regulations and recent improvements on the governance of biomedical devices are reviewed. RECENT FINDINGS: Current regulations on approval of biomedical devices failed to address some important aspects related to the definition of biocompatibility of medical implants. The main issue was that the failure to establish design requirements for a specific application - in this case, the pelvic floor. Another issue was the lack of knowledge on disease mechanisms leading to an inability to define clear targets for surgical treatment. A clear example of this is the recent vaginal mesh scandal. SUMMARY: Surgical innovations are inherently challenging. It is no surprise that the regulatory landscape lags behind advancements in biomedical technologies. Very recent modifications to the available regulations particularly in Europe aim to establish a robust, transparent, predictable and sustainable regulatory framework for medical devices, which ensures patient safety while supporting innovation.

Medical Malpractice in Image-Guided Procedures: An Analysis of 184 Cases.

PURPOSE: To report types and outcomes of a small subset of malpractice lawsuits filed against physicians performing image-guided interventions in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 1,312 cases involving common image-guided procedures were reviewed from the Westlaw and LexisNexis databases in the United States from 1963 to 2018. Social Security, disability, employment contract, product liability, criminal, and government employment claims were excluded. The final legal cohort comprised 184 (14.0%) cases. They were categorized into vascular (113/184; 61.4%), inferior vena cava filter (n = 22; 12.0%), neurointerventional (n = 13; 7.1%), gastrointestinal and genitourinary (n = 17; 9.2%), foreign body (n = 7; 3.8%), biopsy related (n = 9; 4.9%), and oncologic (n = 3; 1.6%) interventions. Claims were also organized by defendant type and by specialty, complication stage, verdict, and year. RESULTS: From 2001 to 2018, 58.7% of claims (n = 108) were reported. Procedural complications related to arteriography were most commonly litigated (63/113; 55.8%). Claims arising from intra-procedural and early post-procedural complications were common (84/184; 45.7%). Community hospitals were most often named as defendants (61/184; 33.2%). In reported outcomes, courts sided with defendants in 81.9% (104/127) of the cases, similar to national malpractice trends. Unreported outcomes comprised 31% (57/184) of the data. CONCLUSIONS: For the small subset of claims published within national legal databases, intra-procedural and early post-procedural complications after diagnostic arteriography were most commonly litigated. Most (81.9%) claims with reported outcomes sided with the defendant physician.

ISPOR, the FDA, and the Evolving Regulatory Science of Medical Device Products.

The International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) is a key venue for members from private industry, government, and academia to collaborate and share advances in regulatory, clinical, and reimbursement science for drugs, devices, and diagnostics. In parallel, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) "is responsible for advancing the public health by helping to speed innovations that make medical products more effective, safer, and more affordable." In 2012, the Medical Device Innovation Consortium (MDIC) was formed as a public-private partnership bringing together government, industry, and nonprofit organizations to advance approaches that promote patient access to safe, innovative medical technologies. With a focus on regulatory science, the MDIC has been assessing how to apply real-world evidence (RWE) regulatory science to medical devices. A key goal of this project is to review the history of RWE regulatory science, define terms, and explain why and how RWE is being considered across the total product life cycle, including regulatory assessment. Unique considerations of real-world data for in vitro diagnostics are also taken into account. We envision that these activities will help ensure a high level of rigor and integrity of RWE necessary for regulatory use cases and demonstrate where RWE can be successfully used for regulatory decision making. The ISPOR, FDA, and MDIC are providing the needed leadership in ensuring that diverse stakeholders share a meaningful voice in determining RWE use and, by so doing, are improving the quality and efficiency of care, enhancing health outcomes, and addressing broader societal concerns of reducing health disparities and costs.

A Contemporary Medicolegal Analysis of Outpatient Interventional Pain Procedures: 2009-2016.

BACKGROUND: Closed malpractice claim studies allow a review of rare but often severe complications, yielding useful insight into improving patient safety and decreasing practitioner liability. METHODS: This retrospective observational study of pain medicine malpractice claims utilizes the Controlled Risk Insurance Company Comparative Benchmarking System database, which contains nearly 400,000 malpractice claims drawn from >400 academic and community medical centers. The Controlled Risk Insurance Company Comparative Benchmarking System database was queried for January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2016, for cases with pain medicine as the primary service. Cases involving outpatient interventional pain management were identified. Controlled Risk Insurance Company-coded data fields and the narrative summaries were reviewed by the study authors. RESULTS: A total of 126 closed claims were identified. Forty-one claims resulted in payments to the plaintiffs, with a median payment of $175,000 (range, $2600-$2,950,000). Lumbar interlaminar epidural steroid injections were the most common procedures associated with claims (n = 34), followed by cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injections (n = 31) and trigger point injections (n = 13). The most common alleged injuring events were an improper performance of a procedure (n = 38); alleged nonsterile technique (n = 17); unintentional dural puncture (n = 13); needle misdirected to the spinal cord (n = 11); and needle misdirected to the lung (n = 10). The most common alleged outcomes were worsening pain (n = 26); spinal cord infarct (n = 16); epidural hematoma (n = 9); soft-tissue infection (n = 9); postdural puncture headache (n = 9); and pneumothorax (n = 9). According to the Controlled Risk Insurance Company proprietary contributing factor system, perceived deficits in technical skill were present in 83% of claims. CONCLUSIONS: Epidural steroid injections are among the most commonly performed interventional pain procedures and, while a familiar procedure to pain management practitioners, may result in significant neurological injury. Trigger point injections, while generally considered safe, may result in pneumothorax or injury to other deep structures. Ultimately, the efforts to minimize practitioner liability and patient harm, like the claims themselves, will be multifactorial. Best outcomes will likely come from continued robust training in procedural skills, attention paid to published best practice recommendations, documentation that includes an inclusive consent discussion, and thoughtful patient selection. Limitations for this study are that closed claim data do not cover all complications that occur and skew toward more severe complications. In addition, the data from Controlled Risk Insurance Company Comparative Benchmarking System cannot be independently verified.

Medical Oversight and Scope of Practice of Medical Spas (Med-Spas).

BACKGROUND: The regulation of medical spas (med-spas) in the United States varies considerably from state to state with important ramifications for patient safety. OBJECTIVE: To describe the current state of med-spas in the United States and degree of medical oversight in these facilities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Descriptive study based on web search and standardized phone interviews of med-spas in the most heavily populated cities in each state of the United States. Information obtained included the following: whether medical directors were listed; if so, whether they were advertised as being on site; medical directors' training and board certification; and services offered. RESULTS: Of 247 medical spas reviewed, 72% advertised a medical director on their website, and 6.5% claimed that the director was on site. Of listed medical directors, 41% were trained in dermatology and/or plastic surgery. In phone interviews, 79% of med-spas endorsed the medical director to be board certified, and 52% stated that the medical director was on site less than 50% of the time. CONCLUSION: There is significant variation in medical directorship and oversight among medical spas in the United States. Appropriate regulation of medical directors' training and the degree of oversight provided are warranted to optimize patient safety.

The contribution of legal medicine in clinical risk management.

BACKGROUND: In advanced health services, a main objective is to promote the culture of safety and clinical risk management. In this regard, the reporting of sentinel events fits within a perspective of error analysis, attempting to propose solutions aimed at preventing a new occurrence of the harmful event. The purpose of this study is to analyze the contribution of medico-legal litigation in the management of clinical risk and to propose an organizational model so as to coordinate the intervention of clinical risk management and medico-legal services. METHODS: Retrospective review of 206 cases of medico-legal litigation, settled against a Hospital of a North-eastern city in Italy from January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2015. RESULTS: Approximately 20% of cases, that are classifiable as "sentinel events", were not reported due to various factors. The reason that these events are under-reported is mainly due to the latency between the event itself and its manifestation as a serious damage to health as well as the discomfort in reporting the events of this kind, which is still widespread among healthcare workers. The systematic research of the available documentation for medico-legal purposes permits the acquisition of more information concerning the clinical event, thereby increasing the number and accuracy of the reports to the clinical risk unit. CONCLUSION: The analysis of medico-legal litigation is a valid tool to enhance the reporting of "sentinel events". One possible proposal is the implementation of an organizational model to establish a rapid procedure for the reporting of sentinel events during the evaluation of medico-legal litigations.

Ocular Cosmetics: Public Safety Problem or Harmless Products?

PURPOSE: This perspective explores the safety profile of ocular cosmetics and explores the role ophthalmologists can play in mitigating potential ocular harm from unsafe products. METHODS: N/A. RESULTS: Cosmetics and personal care products represent a large industry that is currently unregulated in any meaningful way. Products intended for use around the eyes carry a risk of serious side effects including contact dermatitis and bacterial infection. Currently, legislation has been proposed to change regulation to provide more meaningful oversight of cosmetics. CONCLUSIONS: Ophthalmologists are often the first to recognize patterns in harmful products intended for use around the eye and can help mitigate potential future ocular harm by reporting adverse events to the Food and Drug Administration and by advocating for cosmetic regulation change.