Featured Posts
- Urgent Hospital Readmissions are Avoidable in Nearly One out of Five Cases
- Medical Malpractice Risk Perception at Odds with the Reality
- Patients Need to Act Promptly in a Medical Mapractice Case
- Long-Term Care and Nursing Home Legislation Mandates Health Care and Prohibits Neglect and Abuse
- Recent Study Finds Doctors Unrevealing About Treatment Options
- Higher Standards in Hospital Policies
- Whither Medical Malpractice Compensation
Recent Posts
- Rate of Prescribing Errors in General Practice Revealed
- Pathology Errors Continue at Windsor Hospitals
- Misdiagnosed Patient
- Consequences of Bariatric Surgery Malpractice
- Measures of Hospital Safety are Incomplete
- Wrong Level Spine Surgery
- Medical Negligence Claims Shown to Improve Patient Safety
- Nine Types of Pharmacist Negligence
- Twelve Hospital Negligence Errors
- A Survival Guide to Obstetrical Malpractice for 2012 at the Mount Sinai Hospital
- Failure to Diagnose Cancer Cases Explained
- Urgent Hospital Readmissions are Avoidable in Nearly One out of Five Cases
- Medical Malpractice Risk Perception at Odds with the Reality
- Teaching Medical Malpractice Advocacy at the University of Toronto
- Medical Device Approval Process Is Defective
- Medical Errors Continue to Harm Patients According to a New Study
- Urological Medical Malpractice
- Lung Cancer and Medical Malpractice
- Wrong Site Surgery Increases After the Introduction of the Universal Protocol
- Practical Car Accident Tips
- Patients Need to Act Promptly in a Medical Mapractice Case
- Sudbury Regional Hospital Emergency Department Performance Worsening
- Long-Term Care and Nursing Home Legislation Mandates Health Care and Prohibits Neglect and Abuse
- Surgeons and Referring Physicians are Responsible for Wrong Site and Patient Procedures
- Recent Study Finds Doctors Unrevealing About Treatment Options
- Medical Malpractice Lawsuits Require Expert Opinion Evidence before Trial
- Gastric Banding Concerns for Teenagers
- Cataracts Lead to Diagnostic Errors
- Drug Side Effect Reporting
- The Elderly Continue to be at Risk from Anti-Psychotic Medication
- Champix Safety Brought into Question
- Surgeons Can Do More to Reduce the Risk of Infection
- Never Events Responsible for Every Sixth Claim
- Chelation Study Suspended
- Joint Commission Alert: Prevent Blood Thinner Deaths and Overdoses: Anticoagulant therapy linked to high rate of errors
- Antibiotic use in pregnancy linked to cerebral palsy
- Canada’s health care fares poorly when compared to Western Europe
- The Vulnerable Hurt by Caps on Medical Malpractice Claims
- Vaccine Risk Declarations and Nurses
- Loss of Chance in the Medical Case Alive in Massachusetts
- Higher Standards in Hospital Policies
- Drug Safety
- Promotion of Patient’s Rights of Regulatory Concern
- Whither Medical Malpractice Compensation
- Medical Research Under Scrutiny
Ways To Connect
Categories
Chelation Study Suspended
The Associated Press reports the chelation heart disease study has stopped enrolling people while officials investigate whether participants were fully informed of the risks and are being adequately protected. Partcipating in the study are more than 1500 heart attack survivors including Canadians. Dr. Gervasio Lamas of the University of Miami acknowledged that some doctors who had been involved in the study have been disciplined by state boards or have criminal records and have been asked to drop out. Liz Woeckner, president of Citizens for Responsible Care and Research, or CIRCARE, a non-profit group focused on research safety, is quoted as saying “The consent form is inadequate. It doesn’t tell people, for example, that people have died from this drug,”. Chelation has been highly controversial, and the American Heart Association and other groups have spoken out against it. Chelation involves intravenous doses of a drug disodium EDTA. EDTA ia a synthetic amino acid infused intavenously to remove calcium deposits. It is known to cause kidney failure, bone marrow problems, shock, low blood pressure, convulsions, heart rhythm problems, allergic reactions and breathing troubles. However the trial itself has not been stopped. Legal practitioners will want to consider whether particpants in the study received adequate disclosure of the risks involved. The provision of information in the process of obtaining consent to treatment that is of a trial nature requires a much higher degree of disclosure that that required for medically accepted treatment. The fact of the suspension itself is a material consideration which should be brought to the attention of participants.