Indiana Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Hospital falls are a significant problem in Indiana and across the nation. Indiana medical malpractice lawyers can help patients and their families injured as a result of a hospital fall.

Studies have found falls to be the single most significant adverse event encountered in hospitals. Hospital falls lead to longer stays, increased bills, decreased function, and diminished quality of life. Elderly patients are particularly at risk. The Institute for Healthcare Improvement reports that 10% of fatal falls for the elderly occur in hospitals.

Because of the severe consequences of patient falls at hospitals, the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) included fall prevention in hospitals in its 2005 National Patient Safety Goals. Those goals called for hospitals to "assess and periodically reassess each patient's risk for falling, including the potential risk associated with the patient's medication regiment, and take action to address any identified risks."

A hospital's failure to make a proper assessment of a patient's risk for falling, or its failure to take steps to prevent the fall of an at-risk patient, may be malpractice. If you or a loved one has suffered an injury as a result of a fall at a hospital, contact the experienced Indiana medical malpractice attorneys at Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C.

Indiana medical malpractice lawyers often deal with cases where surgeons have failed to remove from the patient sponges or instruments used during the course of surgery. The frequency with which this problem occurs is uncertain. However, an article in the journal Abdominal Surgery suggests that retained sponges may occur once in every 1,000 to 1,500 intra-abdominal surgeries.

A retained surgical sponge can lead to a host of problems for the patient, including infection, pain, additional surgery, and even death. The American College of Surgeons has recognized the seriousness of the problem by publishing guidelines to help surgeons avoid the mistake. Those guidelines include documentation of the results of surgical item counts and documentation of the action taken if there is a discrepancy in the count. Some hospitals have gone further. For instance, the Mayo Clinic uses bar coded surgical sponges to make sure the sponges are not left in the patient.

A retained sponge or surgical instrument is almost always the result of medical malpractice. If you or a loved one has been injured as a result of medical malpractice, the Indiana medical malpractice lawyers at Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. may be able to help. Contact us for a free consultation.

Birth injury can be devastating, leaving its victims with serious permanent impairments. Indiana medical malpractice lawyers frequently handle cases where birth injuries could have been prevented if doctors had heeded the warnings provided by fetal monitor strips.

In most deliveries, electronic fetal heart monitoring is used to track how the baby is responding to labor. External fetal heart monitoring is performed by attaching transducers to the mother's abdomen. The transducers use Doppler ultrasound to detect fetal heart motion, and the information is sent to a fetal heart monitor which calculates and records the fetal heart rate on a continuous strip of paper.

Certain patterns on the strip are indicative of fetal distress. Doctors and labor and delivery nurses are trained to recognize these patterns and respond appropriately. The responses may include repositioning the mother, administering oxygen, or proceeding to immediate delivery via cesarean section. If a healthcare provider fails to recognize and appropriately respond to monitor patterns showing fetal distress, the baby may suffer serious injury, such as brain damage or even death.

The Indiana medical malpractice lawyers at Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. have handled many cases involving the failure to appropriately respond to signs of distress on fetal monitor strips. Contact them for a free consultation.

The concept of differential diagnosis is often at the heart of Indiana medical malpractice trials. A differential diagnosis is the process used by doctors to determine the cause of a patient's symptoms. The doctor creates a list of the conditions that could be causing the patient's problems, and then pares down the list through a process of elimination until a diagnosis is determined.

A differential diagnosis is frequently employed in the setting of patients presenting to the emergency room with acute abdominal pain. Patients with acute abdominal pain account for 5 to 10% of all emergency room visits in the United States. The list of potential causes of acute abdominal pain is huge and ranges from relatively minor conditions (constipation) to potentially life-threatening conditions (aortic aneurysm).

Problems arise when doctors assume the patient's symptoms are being caused by a minor condition without ruling out a potentially deadly condition. For example, patients with acute appendicitis are sometimes discharged from hospital emergency rooms with a diagnosis of gastroenteritis, or stomach flu. Such a patient may go on to have his appendix rupture, leading to prolonged hospitalization or even death.

If you or a loved on has been injured as a result of a doctor's failure to properly employ a differential diagnosis, an experienced Indiana medical malpractice lawyer may be able to help.

The Indiana medical malpractice lawyers of Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. recently received a $1.26 million jury verdict in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana in Hammond, Indiana.

The medical malpractice verdict came in the case of Nolan v. Arora, M.D. In July of 2000, Dr. Arora performed a Racz catheter procedure on Patty Nolan. The procedure is a pain management procedure that involves placing a catheter in the epidural space of the spinal canal and injecting a local anesthetic and then hypertonic saline through the catheter to remove scar tissue and, hopefully, ease the patient's pain.

When Dr. Arora injected the local anesthetic, Mrs. Nolan experienced a profound motor and sensory block. At trial, Mrs. Nolan's attorneys argued that that this should have been a warning sign to the doctor that his catheter was in the subdural space rather than the epidural space. Injections of hypertonic saline into the subdural space could cause serious nerve damage. Rather than terminate the procedure or check the placement of his catheter with fluoroscopy, the doctor left his catheter in place, waited for the blocks to wear off, then had Mrs. Nolan return the following day for an additional injection of anesthetic and the hypertonic saline. Mrs. Nolan then developed a cauda equina syndrome resulting in leg weakness and permanent bowel and bladder dysfunction.

The jury entered its verdict on March 19, 2010 at the conclusion of a five-day trial. (Indiana law limits the maximum amount that may be recovered on the jury verdict to $1.25 million.)

The Indiana medical malpractice lawyers at Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. are frequently faced with cases involving deep vein thrombosis. Deep vein thrombosis (or DVT) is a condition where a blood clot forms in one or more the body's deep veins, usually in the lower legs.

The major risk from DVT is pulmonary embolism. A pulmonary embolism occurs when a piece of the clot breaks off and travels to the lung. A pulmonary embolism can have serious consequences for the patient, including sudden death.

Hospital patients who have been immobilized for prolonged periods of time or who have undergone major surgery are particularly susceptible to DVT and resulting pulmonary embolism. Doctors can reduce the risk of DVT and pulmonary embolism through the use of medications and other methods.

The failure to take appropriate steps to prevent DVT may be malpractice. An experienced medical malpractice attorney can evaluate such claims and help determine whether legal action is appropriate.

Indiana medical malpractice lawyers frequently must deal with issues concerning negligently performed gallbladder surgery. Injuries to patients from these surgeries can be devastating, leading to massive medical expenses, permanent liver damage, or even death.

Gallbladder problems are usually caused by gallstones, which are formed when chemicals in the gall bladder concentrate and harden into a lump. The presence of gallstones in the gallbladder typically cause pain in the right upper quadrant. The treatment of choice for gallstones is removal of the gallbladder, also known as cholecystectomy.

Most gallbladder removals today are performed laparoscopically. The physician inserts thin instruments through small incisions in the patient's abdomen. The physician views the surgical field on a video monitor. Because of the small incisions, recovery time is much quicker than with traditional methods of surgery.

While laparoscopic cholecystectomy provides quicker recovery for most patients, it also presents heightened risks. Because the surgeon is viewing the anatomy on a two-dimensional screen, errors in perception may occur. Those errors can lead to the most feared complication of gallbladder surgery -- common bile duct injury.

Bile duct injuries are often the result of physicians not being as careful as they should be. If you or a loved one has been injured as a result of gallbladder surgery, an experienced Indiana medical malpractice lawyer may be able to help.

The Indiana medical malpractice lawyers of Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C.recently argued an important case before the Indiana Supreme Court. The issue raised in the case is whether family members who witness the death or injury of their loved one as a result of medical malpractice may recover for their emotional distress under Indiana's Medical Malpractice Act.

The case presented to the supreme court is Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund v. Gary Patrick. In the case, Gary Patrick watched as his son died before his eyes as a result of medical malpractice. Mr. Patrick was represented by Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. in the trial court and was awarded $600,000 for his emotional distress claim. In addition, Mr. Patrick was awarded $316,531.66 on a separate claim under Indiana's Adult Wrongful Death Statute, the maximum award permitted under that statute.

The Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund appealed the trial court's judgment, arguing that Mr. Patrick was not permitted to recover for his emotional distress damages under the malpractice act. The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment. The supreme court then agreed to take the case and heard arguments from the lawyers on November 12, 2009. The complete argument before the supreme court may be viewed on the player below.

The supreme court is expected to issue its decision within the next few months.

If you or a loved one has a potential medical malpractice case, contact the Indiana medical malpractice attorneys at Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. for a free consultation.

Indiana medical malpractice lawyers have heard the arguments in the ongoing healthcare debate: If you limit what injured patients can recover in malpractice suits, you will lower health care costs. The problem with the argument is it's just not true.

For more than 30 years, Indiana has had tort reform in the area of medical malpractice. In fact, Indiana has one of the most stringent medical malpractice laws in the nation. Indiana patient's injured as a result of a doctor's negligence are limited to a maximum award of $1.25 million. Even if the doctor's negligence has caused the patient to incur medical bills and suffer lost wages far in excess of that figure, the patient's recovery is capped at $1.25 million. When the malpractice act was first enacted in 1975, the cap was only $500,000. From 1990 through 1999, the cap was $750,000.

Despite these strict caps, the cost of health care in Indiana has risen at a rate faster than the national average during the period of time that the caps have been in place. Clearly, limiting patient's rights to recover for their injuries has had little or no impact on the cost of health care in Indiana.

The Indiana medical malpractice lawyers at Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. are fighting to protect patients' rights to recover for injuries suffered at the hands of negligent healthcare providers. If you have a medical malpractice case you would like to discuss, contact us for a free consultation.

A major issue in Indiana medical malpractice law will be presented to the Indiana Supreme Court on November 12. On that date, the court will hear arguments in the case of Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund v. Patrick. Among the issues presented by the case is the question of whether emotional distress claims may be pursued under the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act.

In the Patrick case, Gary Patrick witnessed the death of his adult son, Christopher, as a result of medical malpractice. Because Christopher had no wife or dependent children, recovery for his death was limited under Indiana law to $300,000 plus funeral and burial and medical expenses. However, Gary contended that he was entitled to bring a claim for his own emotional distress in addition to the claim for the death of his son. The trial court agreed and awarded Gary the maximum amount allowable for the death of his son, plus an additional $600,000 for Gary's independent emotional distress claim. The total judgment was $916,531.66. The Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund appealed, arguing that the emotional distress claim could not be pursued under Indiana's Medical Malpractice Act. The trial court's ruling was affirmed by the court of appeals and the supreme court has now agreed to hear the case.

If the Fund's argument is accepted by the supreme court, it will effectively give doctors immunity for a number of claims. Indiana medical malpractice lawyers Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. are representing Gary Patrick and will be arguing the case before the supreme court.

The Indiana medical malpractice lawyers at Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. remind everyone that October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month. One in every 8 women will have invasive breast cancer during her lifetime. The cause of breast cancer is not fully understood. A number of risk factors are associated with an increased risk for breast cancer including female gender, increasing age, genetic changes (BRCA1 and BRCA2), and personal or family history of breast cancer. Hormone therapy, diet and lifestyle choices may also have some association with increasing the risk for breast cancer.

Earlier diagnosis and better treatment have decreased the number of breast cancer related deaths. The earlier a breast cancer is found, the more treatable it is. Tumor size and whether the cancer has spread are the most important indicators for the patient's survival. For this reason, the American Cancer Society has established screening recommendations for the early diagnosis of breast cancer--before a woman has symptoms:

1. Women over age 40 should have a screening mammogram every year.

2. Women in their 20's and 30's should have a physician breast exam at least every three years. After age 40, women should have a physician breast exam every year.

3. Women at special risk may need earlier or extra screening and should look to their physician for advice. For example, in women at high risk or women with very dense breasts a screening MRI is recommended in addition to the mammogram.

Additionally the American Cancer Society recommends that women start monthly breast self exams at age 20.

Whether you are male or female, if you find a new lump or mass in your breast, it is important to have it checked out by your physician. A new breast lump is the most common presenting sign of breast cancer.

Unacceptable delay in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer can occur on account of malpractice. If you or a loved one has been injured as a result of a delayed diagnosis of breast cancer, contact the Indiana medical malpractice lawyers at Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. for a free consultation.

The Indiana medical malpractice lawyers at Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. represent many patients who have sustained injuries during labor and delivery. One setting in which these injuries frequently occur is in vaginal birth after cesarean section, or, as it is more commonly known, VBAC.

The major risk of VBAC is uterine rupture. The uterus is more susceptible to rupture during a VBAC delivery due to the incision made in the uterus at the earlier cesarean delivery. Once a uterine rupture occurs, delivery must be completed in a very short time to avoid significant brain injury or death to the child.

Because of the increased risk of uterine rupture, doctors with patients attempting VBAC must be especially careful in preparing for and performing the delivery. Prostaglandins, which are used to induce labor, should not be used in VBAC deliveries as they increase the risk of uterine rupture. Similarly, drugs used to increase maternal contractions such as Pitocin create a significantly increased risk of uterine rupture in VBAC deliveries. Because of the increased risk and catastrophic consequences of uterine rupture, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has recommended that VBAC deliveries only be performed in insitutions capable of having physicians immediately available to provide emergency care.

The Indiana medical malpractice lawyers at Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. have substantial experience in handling cases involving VBAC and all other areas of obstetrics. If you or a loved one has suffered such an injury, please contact us for a free consultation.

Heart disease is the leading cause of death for both men and women in the United States. Unfortunately, many of these deaths are the result of doctors failing to promptly diagnose and treat patients experiencing a heart attack.

A study in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine looked at 10,000 patients who went to their hospital Emergency Departments with chest pain or other heart attack symptoms. The study found that one of every 50 people who had suffered a heart attack was misdiagnosed and discharged from the hospital to home. Younger women experiencing heart attacks were especially likely to be misdiagnosed. Women younger than 55 were seven times more likely to be misdiagnosed than men of the same age. The consequences of these misdiagnoses were huge. Patients sent away from the hospital were twice as likely to die.

The reasons for misdiagnoses vary. Frequently, patients with heart attacks do not present with the "classic" symptoms. This is often the case with women experiencing a heart attack.

The Indiana medical malpractice lawyers at Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. have represented numerous Indiana patients who have been injured as a result of the misdiagnosis or delayed treatment of a heart attack. If you or a loved one needs legal representation with such a case, please feel free to contact us.

The current health care debate has raised many questions about the decisions made by Indiana doctors in treating their patients. Lost in the discussion is the fact that, by law in Indiana, the right to make treatment decisions lies with the patient.
Indiana Code Sec. 34-18-13-3 requires Indiana physicians to obtain their patient's "informed consent" before any "treatment, procedure test, or examination" is performed by the physician. In order to obtain informed consent, the doctor must advise the patient of:
(1) The general nature of the patient's condition.
(2) The proposed treatment, procedure, examination, or test.
(3) The expected outcome of the treatment, procedure, examination, or test.
(4) The material risks of the treatment, procedure, examination, or test.
(5) The reasonable alternatives to the treatment, procedure, examination, or test.
If a doctor treats a patient without obtaining the patient's informed consent to the treatment and the patient is injured, the patient may have a malpractice claim against the doctor. The situation frequently arises when doctors fail to tell their patients of risks of or alternatives to proposed surgery.
The attorneys at Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. have a wealth of experience in dealing with Indiana malpractice claims involving issues of informed consent. If you or a loved one has been injured by malpractice, please feel free to contact us.

As the debate over national health care has intensified, some have proposed limiting the rights of victims of medical malpractice as a way to lower health care costs. Such proposals are designed to protect negligent health care providers, and have little or no impact on health care costs.
Leading economists have recognized that the impact of medical malpractice judgments and settlements amounts to a "drop in the bucket" in the context of the $2.3 trillion spent annually on health care in the United States. The reality is that the entire cost of medical malpractice lawsuits -- including legal fees, insurance costs and payouts -- totals less than one half of one percent of health care spending. Obviously, limiting patient's rights to recover for injuries caused by malpractice has little to do with containing health care costs and everything to do with protecting negligent physicians.
The Indiana medical malpractice attorneys at Garau Germano Hanley & Pennington, P.C. oppose the current efforts to restrict injured patients' right to justice. Allowing health care providers to escape responsibility for their negligence will not lower health costs.