Download text"Medicine (and the post office) are the only

yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
possibility that it would be done under the auspices of the Patient Safety Act of
2005, which created Patient Safety Organizations and protections, to allow
confidential information about harm and error to be shared without fear of
discovery or litigation.""this is completely stupid. AHRQ has nothing to do with
any effective enforcement mechanism. This is a complete blind alley masquerading as
a solution. We need enforcement, not studies.""First of all, I am not in favor of
more 'confidential"" complaining, as the beneficiaries of that appear to be
hospitals, not patients. I want every person whose toe crosses the threshold of
Inova to know that the place starved my mother, on purpose. If I could, I would
spray paint the entrances with abandon hope anyone who comes here. Flee flee! I
wish that every single complaint against Inova had been public and seachable on the
internet because we would have made sure mom went elsewhere on the first visit. I
want the people who work there to be ashamed of their jobs, to be embarrassed to
answer where they work. I want the administrators be questioned on what went wrong
when they try to find a job elsewhere. I have nothing to be ashamed of. Inova does.
Number two our problem is not a lack of places to complain to; there is a surfeit.
the problem is that they don't talk to each other and nobody wants to actually hold
providers accountable, to impose sanctions, to impose serious penalties and to
generally kick butt. Which, I would hope honest doctors and honest administrators
would want to have happen to the bad guys. Cheryl Clark patients are not afraid of
""discovery or litigation."" That;s the HOSPITALS. so if it is being written to
prevent discovery and litigation, it is being written to favor HOSPITALS, not
patients. If you look at the British system, if there is a patient complaint, it
is investigated, the patients can be compensated through the complaint process and
the fruits of that investigation can be used by plaintiffs in suing. They have in
fact reformed the system to make sure that can be. And that information is cycled
back into the process to prevent errors. I am not in favor of much of the British
system, but this makes a whole lot more sense than fifteen complaint processes that
remind one of the song, 'we're on a road to nowhere."" With everything hush hush so
there is no accountability, no public awareness, no useful information and just a
distraction to pretend that we are doing something when we are not.""As i
understand it, the patient or his or her loved ones, would be free to litigate the
incident. The protection for the hospital might come in case, months or years
later, an attorney wants to find out what these hospital folks were told about
prior incidents. The hospital would agree to set up this system under the patient
safety act which established psos in 2005. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear in my
column or prior post. The other piece of this that needs emphasis is that i think
the idea is to get patients to report less egregious types of incidents and/or
harm, or near misses. ( the egregious ones are more likely to be discovered). For
example -- My nurse brought up the wrong medication, she realized this and went
back to get the right medication. I had to wait, but i got the right medication an
hour later. From a hospital perspective this might be helpful in shedding light on
a process flaw that resulted in the nurse bringing the wrong medication in the
first place. Also this is not a study. It's a pilot project. I think it's worth a
shot. A pilot project.""I agree with Debra Van Putten. We KNOW THE STATISTICS
ALREADY!!! The studies are out there and there is enough evidence that patients
are harmed. We get that. There needs to be a system in place to ADDRESS THE
PATIENTS WHO ARE HARMED! It needs to be fair, and compensation should be directed
to the victims of medical error in a timely manner. That's why doctors/health care
providers have insurance. And if the insurance lobby, and the institutional
investors aren't happy with their dividends that year, blame the doctors / health
care providers for screwing up the patients! In clear cases of gross negligence,
STOP CREATING LIFE IN HELL for the patients who have been harmed. Talk about
adding insult to injury. When I was injured I was under anesthesia and had nothing
to do with it. And yet, as a patient the wall of silence goes up. You know who
profited from my pain and suffering -- the defense law firm. My total knee
replacement was so botched by the orthopedic surgeon that another orthpedic had to
grind out my femur and tibia and implant metal rods to correct the misalignment. I
couldn't walk. The diagnosis AFTER my TKA ""malpositioned prosthetic components.""