Electronic Medical Records, Health Care Reform and Medical Malpractice: Hand in Hand?

In the acrimonious health care reform debate a common denominator for all participants has been the need to digitize medical records. The perceived advantages include greater access to records and the ability of physicians in different locations to communicate about patients while swiftly assaying the patients' medical chart.

These same advantages have also been enthusiastically embraced as a mechanism for reducing medical malpractice and enhancing patient outcomes. Additionally, it has been thought that electronic record-keeping will reduce medical costs overall.

Unfortunately, the reality is that errors in software, data input and a siginificant incidence of computer malfuction may have created a very expensive monster. Reports of computer glitches which resulted in children systematically being given adult doses of medicines and other problems have been reported.

After a century of paper record-keeping the transition to digital records is both time-consuming and expensive. The Washington Post explores this topic in detail and focuses on the difference between the practical reality of transitioning to electronic records and the hoped for benefits. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/24/AR2009102400967.html?hpid=topnews

This tranistion has also created a whole new species of medical malpractice claims that we, at Clark and Steinhorn are seeing. These are medical negligence cases in the District of Columbia and Maryland with both written and digital records.

Needless to say this complicates matters considerably. I suspect that it also complicates matters for health care providers and hospitals. As an avid supporter of reduced health care costs and reduced incidence of medical malpractice, I hope that this inevitable transition goes more smoothly.

Health Insurance Saves Lives

It is probably no great suprise but health insurance saves lives and lack of it kills. This is the conclusion of a recent Harvard Medical School Study. The study followed 9,000 patients aged from 17 to 64 and revealed that 45,000 Americans die each year largely because they do not have health insurance.

This number represents a substantial increase over a study conducted just seven years ago. The thought is that uninsured people are not able to receive care for chronic conditions such as heart disease, diabetes and depression and consequently are far more likely to succumb to these disease processes than those who can benefit from regular monitoring, treatment and medication.

It is against this backdrop that the national health care debate is taking place with more than 46 million Americans uninsured. The study concludes that these uninsured are at a 40% greater risk of death than their insured counterparts.
Bolstering these conclusions are findings discussed previously on this website (see   http://www.maryland-law.com/blog/universal-health-care-medical-malpractice-and-wrongful-death-the-first-reduces-the-others.cfm  )

Additionally, it is thought that the incidence of wrongful death in medical malpractice actions would be substantially reduced by insuring the population overall, as fewer patients would present to doctors and hospitals with untreated conditions.