The American Medical System is the Leading Cause of Death and Injury in the United States
Mood:
don't ask
Topic: Safety
Medical Mistakes
· Introduction to Medical Mistakes
· Causes of Medical Mistakes
· How Common Are Medical Mistakes?
· Types of Medical Mistakes
· Medication errors
· Nosocomial Infections
· Preventing Medical Mistakes
The American Medical System
Is The Leading Cause Of Death And Injury In The United States
By Gary Null PhD, Carolyn Dean MD ND, Martin Feldman MD, Debora Rasio MD, Dorothy Smith PhD A definitive review and close reading of medical peer-review journals, and government health statistics shows that American medicine frequently causes more harm than good. The number of people having in-hospital, adverse drug reactions (ADR) to prescribed medicine is 2.2 million. (1) Dr. Richard Besser, of the CDC , in 1995, said the number of unnecessary antibiotics prescribed annually for viral infections was 20 million. Dr. Besser, in 2003, now refers to tens of millions of unnecessary antibiotics. (2, 2a)
The number of unnecessary medical and surgical procedures performed annually is 7.5 million. (3) The number of people exposed to unnecessary hospitalization annually is 8.9 million. (4) The total number of iatrogenic [induced inadvertently by a physician or surgeon or by medical treatment or diagnostic procedures] deaths is 783,936.
The 2001 heart disease annual death rate is 699,697; the annual cancer death rate is 553,251. (5) It is evident that the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the United States.
Introduction
Never before have the complete statistics on the multiple causes of iatrogenesis been combined in one paper. Medical science amasses tens of thousands of papers annually—each one a tiny fragment of the whole picture. To look at only one piece and try to understand the benefits and risks is to stand one inch away from an elephant and describe everything about it. You have to pull back to reveal the complete picture, such as we have done here. Each specialty, each division of medicine, keeps their own records and data on morbidity and mortality like pieces of a puzzle. But the numbers and statistics were always hiding in plain sight. We have now completed the painstaking work of reviewing thousands and thousands of studies. Finally putting the puzzle together we came up with some disturbing answers.
Is American Medicine Working?
At 14% of the Gross National Product, health care spending reached $1.6 trillion in 2003. (15) Considering this enormous expenditure, we should have the best medicine in the world. We should be reversing disease, preventing disease, and doing minimal harm. However, careful and objective review shows the opposite. Because of the extraordinary narrow context of medical technology through which contemporary medicine examines the human condition, we are completely missing the full picture.
Medicine is not taking into consideration the following monumentally important aspects of a healthy human organism:
(a) Stress and how it adversely affects the immune system and life processes
(b) Insufficient exercise
(c) Excessive caloric intake
(d) Highly processed and denatured foods grown in denatured and chemically damaged soil
(e) Exposure to tens of thousands of environmental toxins.
Instead of minimizing these disease-causing factors, we actually cause more illness through medical technology, diagnostic testing, overuse of medical and surgical procedures, and overuse of pharmaceutical drugs. The huge disservice of this therapeutic strategy is the result of little effort or money being appropriated for preventing disease.
Under-reporting of Iatrogenic Events
As few as 5% and only up to 20% of Iatrogenic acts are ever reported. (16, 24, 25, 33,34) This implies that if medical errors were completely and accurately reported, we would have a much higher annual Iatrogenic death rate than 783,936. Dr. Leape, in 1994, said his figure of 180,000 medical mistakes annually was equivalent to three jumbo-jet crashes every two days. (16) Our report shows that six jumbo jets are falling out of the sky each and every day.
Correcting a Compromised System
What we must deduce from this report is that medicine is in need of complete and total reform: from the curriculum in medical schools to protecting patients from excessive medical intervention. It is quite obvious that we can't change anything if we are not honest about what needs to be changed. This report simply shows the degree to which change is required.
We are fully aware that what stands in the way of change are powerful pharmaceutical companies, medical technology companies, and special interest groups with enormous vested interests in the business of medicine. They fund medical research, support medical schools and hospitals, and advertise in medical journals. With deep pockets they entice scientists and academics to support their efforts. Such funding can sway the balance of opinion from professional caution to uncritical acceptance of a new therapy or drug.
You only have to look at the number of invested people on hospital, medical, and government health advisory boards to see conflict of interest. The public is mostly unaware of these interlocking interests. For example, a 2003 study found that nearly half of medical school faculty, who serve on Institutional Review Boards (IRB) to advise on clinical trial research, also serve as consultants to the pharmaceutical industry. (17) The authors were concerned that such representation could cause potential conflicts of interest.
A news release by Dr. Erik Campbell, the lead author, said, "Our previous research with faculty has shown us that ties to industry can affect scientific behavior, leading to such things as trade secrecy and delays in publishing research. It's possible that similar relationships with companies could affect IRB members' activities and attitudes." (18)
Medical Ethics and Conflict of Interest in Scientific Medicine
Jonathan Quick, director of Essential Drugs and Medicines Policy for the World Health Organization (WHO) wrote in a recent WHO Bulletin:
"If clinical trials become a commercial venture in which self-interest overrules public interest and desire overrules science, then the social contract which allows research on human subjects in return for medical advances is broken." (19)
Former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Dr. Marcia Angell, struggled to bring the attention of the world to the problem of commercializing scientific research in her outgoing editorial titled "Is Academic Medicine for Sale?" (20) Angell called for stronger restrictions on pharmaceutical stock ownership and other financial incentives for researchers. She said that growing conflicts of interest are tainting science.
She warned that, "When the boundaries between industry and academic medicine become as blurred as they are now, the business goals of industry influence the mission of medical schools in multiple ways." She did not discount the benefits of research but said a Faustian bargain now existed between medical schools and the pharmaceutical industry.
Angell left the NEMJ in June 2000. Two years later, in June 2002, the NEJM announced that it would now accept biased journalists (those who accept money from drug companies) because it is too difficult to find ones who have no ties. Another former editor of the journal, Dr. Jerome Kassirer, said that was just not the case, that there are plenty of researchers who don't work for drug companies. (21) The ABC report said that one measurable tie between pharmaceutical companies and doctors amounts to over $2 billion a year spent for over 314,000 events that doctors attend.
The ABC report also noted that a survey of clinical trials revealed that when a drug company funds a study, there is a 90% chance that the drug will be perceived as effective whereas a non-drug company-funded study will show favorable results 50% of the time.
It appears that money can't buy you love but it can buy you any "scientific" result you want.
The only safeguard to reporting these studies was if the journal writers remained unbiased. That is no longer the case.
Cynthia Crossen, writer for the Wall Street Journal in 1996, published "Tainted Truth: The Manipulation of Fact in America," a book about the widespread practice of lying with statistics. (22) Commenting on the state of scientific research she said that:
"The road to hell was paved with the flood of corporate research dollars that eagerly filled gaps left by slashed government research funding."
Her data on financial involvement showed that in l981 the drug industry "gave" $292 million to colleges and universities for research. In l991 it "gave" $2.1 billion.
The First Iatrogenic Study
Dr. Lucian L. Leape opened medicine's Pandora's box in his 1994 JAMA paper, "Error in Medicine." (16) He began the paper by reminiscing about Florence Nightingale's maxim—"first do no harm." But he found evidence of the opposite happening in medicine. He found that Schimmel reported in 1964 that 20% of hospital patients suffered Iatrogenic injury, with a 20% fatality rate. Steel in 1981 reported that 36% of hospitalized patients experienced iatrogenesis with a 25% fatality rate and adverse drug reactions were involved in 50% of the injuries. Bedell in 1991 reported that 64% of acute heart attacks in one hospital were preventable and were mostly due to adverse drug reactions.
However, Leape focused on his and Brennan's "Harvard Medical Practice Study" published in 1991. (16a) They found that in 1984, in New York State, there was a 4% Iatrogenic injury rate for patients with a 14% fatality rate. From the 98,609 patients injured and the 14% fatality rate, he estimated that in the whole of the United States 180,000 people die each year, partly as a result of Iatrogenic injury. Leape compared these deaths to the equivalent of three jumbo-jet crashes every two days.
Why Leape chose to use the much lower figure of 4% injury for his analysis remains in question. Perhaps he wanted to tread lightly. If Leape had, instead, calculated the average rate among the three studies he cites (36%, 20%, and 4%), he would have come up with a 20% medical error rate. The number of fatalities that he could have presented, using an average rate of injury and his 14% fatality, is an annual 1,189,576 Iatrogenic deaths, or over ten jumbo jets crashing every day.
Leape acknowledged that the literature on medical error is sparse and we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg. He said that when errors are specifically sought out, reported rates are "distressingly high." He cited several autopsy studies with rates as high as 35% to 40% of missed diagnoses causing death. He also commented that an intensive care unit reported an average of 1.7 errors per day per patient, and 29% of those errors were potentially serious or fatal.
We wonder: what is the effect on someone who daily gets the wrong medication, the wrong dose, the wrong procedure; how do we measure the accumulated burden of injury; and when the patient finally succumbs after the tenth error that week, what is entered on the death certificate?
Leape calculated the rate of error in the intensive care unit. First, he found that each patient had an average of 178 "activities" (staff/procedure/medical interactions) a day, of which 1.7 were errors, which means a 1% failure rate. To some this may not seem like much, but putting this into perspective, Leape cited industry standards where in aviation a 0.1% failure rate would mean:
• Two unsafe plane landings per day at O'Hare airport
• In the U.S. mail, 16,000 pieces of lost mail every hour
• In banking, 32,000 bank checks deducted from the wrong bank account every hour
Analyzing why there is so much medical error Leape acknowledged the lack of reporting. Unlike a jumbo-jet crash, which gets instant media coverage, hospital errors are spread out over the country in thousands of different locations. They are also perceived as isolated and unusual events. However, the most important reason that medical error is unrecognized and growing, according to Leape, was, and still is, that doctors and nurses are unequipped to deal with human error, due to the culture of medical training and practice.
Doctors are taught that mistakes are unacceptable. Medical mistakes are therefore viewed as a failure of character and any error equals negligence. We can see how a great deal of sweeping under the rug takes place since nobody is taught what to do when medical error does occur. Leape cited McIntyre and Popper who said the "infallibility model" of medicine leads to intellectual dishonesty with a need to cover up mistakes rather than admit them. There are no Grand Rounds on medical errors, no sharing of failures among doctors and no one to support them emotionally when their error harms a patient. Leape hoped his paper would encourage medicine "to fundamentally change the way they think about errors and why they occur." It's been almost a decade since this groundbreaking work, but the mistakes continue to soar.
One year later, in 1995, a report in JAMA said that:
"Over a million patients are injured in U.S. hospitals each year, and approximately 280,000 die annually as a result of these injuries. Therefore, the Iatrogenic death rate dwarfs the annual automobile accident mortality rate of 45,000 and accounts for more deaths than all other accidents combined." (23)
At a press conference in 1997 Dr. Leape released a nationwide poll on patient iatrogenesis conducted by the National Patient Safety Foundation (NPSF), which is sponsored by the American Medical Association. The survey found that more than 100 million Americans have been impacted directly and indirectly by a medical mistake. 42% were directly affected and a total of 84% personally knew of someone who had experienced a medical mistake.(14) Dr. Leape is a founding member of the NPSF.
Dr. Leape at this press conference also updated his 1994 statistics saying that medical errors in inpatient hospital settings nationwide, as of 1997, could be as high as 3 million and could cost as much as $200 billion. Leape used a 14% fatality rate to determine a medical error death rate of 180,000 in 1994. (16) In 1997, using Leape's base number of 3 million errors, the annual deaths could be as much as 420,000 for inpatients alone. This does not include nursing home deaths, or people in the outpatient community dying of drug side effects or as the result of medical procedures.
Only a Fraction of Medical Errors are Reported
Leape, in 1994, said that he was well aware that medical errors were not being reported. (16) According to a study in two obstetrical units in the U.K., only about one quarter of the adverse incidents on the units are ever reported for reasons of protecting staff or preserving reputations, or fear of reprisals, including law suits. (24) An analysis by Wald and Shojania found that only 1.5% of all adverse events result in an incident report, and only 6% of adverse drug events are identified properly.
The authors learned that the American College of Surgeons gives a very broad guess that surgical incident reports routinely capture only 5% to 30% of adverse events. In one surgical study only 20% of surgical complications resulted in discussion at Morbidity and Mortality Rounds.25 From these studies it appears that all the statistics that are gathered may be substantially underestimating the number of adverse drug and medical therapy incidents. It also underscores the fact that our mortality statistics are actually conservative figures.
An article in Psychiatric Times outlines the stakes involved with reporting medical errors. (26) They found that the public is fearful of suffering a fatal medical error, and doctors are afraid they will be sued if they report an error. This brings up the obvious question: who is reporting medical errors? Usually it is the patient or the patient's surviving family. If no one notices the error, it is never reported. Janet Heinrich, an associate director at the U.S. General Accounting Office responsible for health financing and public health issues, testifying before a House subcommittee about medical errors, said that: "The full magnitude of their threat to the American public is unknown." She added, "Gathering valid and useful information about adverse events is extremely difficult."
She acknowledged that the fear of being blamed, and the potential for legal liability, played key roles in the under-reporting of errors. The Psychiatric Times noted that the American Medical Association is strongly opposed to mandatory reporting of medical errors. (26) If doctors aren't reporting, what about nurses? In a survey of nurses, they also did not report medical mistakes for fear of retaliation. (27)
Standard medical pharmacology texts admit that relatively few doctors ever report adverse drug reactions to the FDA. (28) The reasons range from not knowing such a reporting system exists to fear of being sued because they prescribed a drug that caused harm. (29)However, it is this tremendously flawed system of voluntary reporting from doctors that we depend on to know whether a drug or a medical intervention is harmful.
Pharmacology texts will also tell doctors how hard it is to separate drug side effects from disease symptoms. Treatment failure is most often attributed to the disease and not the drug or the doctor. Doctors are warned, "Probably nowhere else in professional life are mistakes so easily hidden, even from ourselves." (30) It may be hard to accept, but not difficult to understand, why only one in twenty side effects is reported to either hospital administrators or the FDA. (31,31a)
If hospitals admitted to the actual number of errors and mistakes, which is about 20 times what is reported, they would come under intense scrutiny. (32) Jerry Phillips, associate director of the Office of Post Marketing Drug Risk Assessment at the FDA, confirms this number. "In the broader area of adverse drug reaction data, the 250,000 reports received annually probably represent only 5% of the actual reactions that occur." (33) Dr. Jay Cohen, who has extensively researched adverse drug reactions, comments that because only 5% of adverse drug reactions are being reported, there are, in reality, 5 million medication reactions each year.(34)
It remains that whatever figure you choose to believe about the side effects from drugs, all the experts agree that you have to multiply that by 20 to get a more accurate estimate of what is really occurring in the burgeoning "field" of Iatrogenic medicine.
A 2003 survey is all the more distressing because there seems to be no improvement in error reporting even with all the attention on this topic. Dr. Dorothea Wild surveyed medical residents at a community hospital in Connecticut. She found that only half of the residents were aware that the hospital had a medical error-reporting system, and the vast majority didn't use it at all. Dr. Wild says this does not bode well for the future. If doctors don't learn error reporting in their training, they will never use it. And she adds that error reporting is the first step in finding out where the gaps in the medical system are and fixing them. That first baby step has not even begun. (35)
Public Suggestions on Iatrogenesis
In a telephone survey, 1,207 adults were asked to indicate how effective they thought the following would be in reducing preventable medical errors that resulted in serious harm: (36)
• Giving doctors more time to spend with patients: very effective 78%
• Requiring hospitals to develop systems to avoid medical errors: very effective 74%
• Better training of health professionals: very effective 73%
• Using only doctors specially trained in intensive care medicine on intensive care units: very effective 73%
• Requiring hospitals to report all serious medical errors to a state agency: very effective 71%
• Increasing the number of hospital nurses: very effective 69%
• Reducing the work hours of doctors-in-training to avoid fatigue: very effective 66%
• Encouraging hospitals to voluntarily report serious medical errors to a state agency: very effective 62%
Report: Drug Errors Injure 1.5 Million By Todd Zwillich
WebMD Medical News Reviewed By Louise Chang, MD on Thursday, July 20, 2006 July 20, 2006 -- About 1.5 million Americans are injured each year because of errors in their medications, an Institute of Medicine (IOM) report concluded Thursday. The report estimates that such errors in hospitals alone cost the health system well over $3.5 billion per year. That does not include errors made at doctors' offices, pharmacies, long-term care facilities, and in patients' own homes.
The report says on average a hospital patient is subjected to at least one medication error per day.
Experts said that dangerous interactions between drugs probably account for the majority of medication mistakes. But errors and misinterpretations occur at any of dozens of points between a drug's manufacture and when a patient receives treatment.
Preventable Errors
"Many of these errors are preventable," said J. Lyle Bootman, PhD, who chaired the panel issuing the report. The report calls on Congress to drastically boost funding for research into the causes of medication errors, noting that only a few million dollars annually are spent on studies now.
A 1999 Institute of Medicine report estimated that more than 7,000 Americans are killed by medication mistakes each year. "We think that medication errors deserve a really serious commitment. We need to rethink our priorities," said Albert W. Wu, MD, an IOM panel member who is also professor of health policy at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Md.
U.S. doctors now prescribe more than 14,000 drugs, not including the huge range of over-the-counter medications, supplements, and herbal remedies in many Americans' medicine cabinets. The report called for policy makers to speed the development of electronic systems to help catch prescribing mistakes and alert doctors to potential drug interactions.
"It's virtually impossible to be able to track that any more by yourself," Wilson D. Pace, MD, a professor of family medicine at the University of Colorado and a panel member, said of the number of drugs on the U.S. market. Even well-informed physicians and pharmacists face hurdles when ordering drugs.
The FDA is trying to cut down on drug names that sound or look alike. Pharmacists still have to contend with notoriously bad doctors' handwriting, and patients frequently don't inform their doctors about all the drugs they're taking.
More Active Patients
The Institute of Medicine advises Congress on science and health care, and often does so at a level of bureaucratic detail beyond the interest of most members of the public. But experts Thursday appealed directly to consumers to help cut down on medication errors by actively tracking their medications and other treatments. They urged patients to maintain lists of all treatments and to become active in double-checking medications at the pharmacy and at home.
The report also urges patients to:
- Have the provider explain how to use medications properly.
- Get in writing, the name, dosage, purpose, and directions for taking each drug.
- Maintain a list of all drugs and other over-the-counter treatments and take it along for every doctor visit.
- Discuss side effects.
- Discuss drug interactions with other drugs, foods, and diseases.
"There's no way a provider can get them into their system without you telling them about it," Pace said. "If you can, become a more active member of the health care team. If you aren't sure of something, ask," Wu said.
Sound-Alike Names
The FDA recently moved to make drug safety labels more consumer-friendly. Only one drug has so far included the new label in packaging, according to the agency. The FDA is also preparing to issue guidance for the drug industry on how to avoid look-alike, sound-alike names that can confuse patients and health providers.
"We're trying to get companies to seriously think about the names before they submit them to us," Carol Holquist, director of the agency's division of medication errors, tells WebMD.
The report also calls on all physicians to use electronic prescribing systems by 2010. While some hospitals and pharmacies are moving to electronic prescribing, small doctors' offices have been slower to use the technology because of cost. Wu acknowledged that some doctors may chafe at being asked to provide written descriptions on every drug they prescribe to patients. "We'll get used to it," he said. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------SOURCES: "Preventing Medication Errors," Institute of Medicine, July 20, 2006. Lyle Bootman, PhD, dean, University of Arizona College of Pharmacy; chair, Institute of Medicine panel. Wilson D. Pace, MD, professor of family medicine, University of Colorado. Albert W. Wu, professor of health policy, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md. Carol Holquist, director, FDA Division of Medication Errors and Technical Support.
Medical Malpractice Statute of limitations by State
THIS LIST OF MEDICAL MALPRACTICE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IS LIMITED AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE COMPREHENSIVE. THERE ARE OTHER EXCEPTIONS AND TIME PERIODS THAT APPLY TO MOST CASES. THEREFORE, YOU MUST CONSULT A LAWYER WITHOUT DELAY. In addition, special rules and exceptions exist in many states for medical malpractice cases. For example, minors can have the statute "tolled" or stopped until they reach the age of majority in many states. Many states toll the medical malpractice statute for incapacity. Often language exists in the statute that does not start the time limit running until the victim knew or "should have known" about the malpractice. Special rules can exist for medical malpractice involving hidden surgical instruments or "foreign object" cases, in which malpractice is difficult to find in a timely manner. In addition, where there is a death from medical malpractice, many states have "wrongful death" statutes that govern the time limit for bringing an action. Stautes of repose can also place absolute time limits on these exceptions. These rules and exceptions exist in almost all states so you should not merely rely on the general rule, but should seek legal counsel as to the specific rules and exceptions in your state governing medical malpractice Statutes of Limitations.
ALA - 2 years statute of limitations. Ala. Code § 6-5-482.
ARK - 2 years statute of limitations. Ark. Code Ann. § 16-114-203.
CA - 1 year statute of limitations. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 340.5.
CT - 2 years statute of limitations. Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 52-584.
FL - 2 years statute of limitations. Fla. Stat. Ann. § 95.11(4)(b).
GA -2 year statute of limitations. Ga. Code Ann. § 9-3-71.
ILL -2 years statute of limitations. 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. § 5/13-212.
IND - 2 years statute of limitations. Code Ann. § 34-18-7-1.
LA - 1 year statute of limitations. La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 9:5628.
MD - 5 years from the negligence or 3 years from its discovery, whichever date is earlier. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-109.
MA - 3 years statute of limitations. Mass. Ann. Laws ch. 260, § 4.
MICH - 2 years statute of limitations. Laws Ann. §§ 600.5805(5) and 600.5838a.
MN - 2 years statute of limitations. Ann. § 541.07.
MISSISSIPPI - 2 years statute of limitations. Miss. Code Ann. § 15-1-36.
MO - 2 years statute of limitations. Mo. Ann. Stat. § 516.105.
NH -2 yr. statute for med mal, N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 507-C:4, seems to conflict with the statute of limitations for personal injury of 3 years N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 508:4. You should seek New Hampshire Counsel to determine the accurate time limit.
NJ - 2 years statute of limitations. N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:14-2; N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:14-21; N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:31-3.
NY - 2 1/2 years statute of limitations. N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 214a.
NC - 3 yrs statute of limitations. N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 1-15 and 1-52(16)
OHIO - 1 year statute of limitations. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2305.11(
(1).
PA - 2 years statute of limitations. 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 5524.
RI - 3 years statute of limitations. R.I. Gen. Laws §§ 9-1-14.1 and 10-7-2 (1997).
SC - 3 years statute of limitations. S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-545.
TN - 1 year statute of limitations. Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-116.
TX - 2 years statute of limitations. Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. art. 4590i, § 10.01.
VA - 2 years statute of limitations. Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-243.
W. VA. - 2 years statute of limitations. W. Va. Code § 55-7B-4.
WI - 3 years statute of limitations. Wis. Stat. Ann. § 893.55(1)
Hmph...My home state, Ohio, only gives you one year to figure out if you were wrongfully killed. Maryland seems to be the most reasonable State.
This is from: www.medicalmalpractice.com
~Vibe
Blog: URGENT CALL FOR LIGHTWORKERS AND PRAYER! 
This is my mom. She's 93 and the sweetest lady you'd hope to meet. They almost killed her. Read how.
How many times have they almost made deadly mistakes with your loved ones? This is not the first time for us, but it is by far the saddest...To let an elderly person almost die of thirst in an extended care facility is about as low as you can possibly get!
My mom would be dead right now if I hadn't been of the mind to stir up such a fuss. The nurse kept trying to tell me that she was just tired. Here she was severely dehydrated and dying...Worn out from trying to run her bodily functions without any water. Water is essential to LIFE!
Sometimes it's just the simple things that make the difference...not drugs...but something as simple as water.
Please read my share. This hits hard when it hits this close to home...and it's happening more and more all the time.
Vibraceous, ND
Group History Vibraceous ND
Nursing Home Abuse Statistics
The reported nursing home abuse statistics only solidify the fears that nursing home abuse has become a widespread nationwide concern. Reports show nursing home abuse statistics that 30% of the facilities are cited for instances of abuse. Still, even more alarming is the nursing home abuse statistics showing that the majority of all nursing home abuse instances are never even reported. The nursing home abuse statistics include severe instances of abuse ranging from death to malnutrition and dehydration, inadequate medical care, and many other serious injuries and conditions.
Nursing home abuse statistics have raised serious concern as to how to even begin fixing this problem that has already taken countless lives and injured and devastated so many already. Even investigative reporters shedding light on one of the nation's greatest law enforcement challenges of today have been alarmed and appalled at the nursing home abuse statistics. The Special Investigations Division of the House Government Reform Committee prepared a study of nursing home abuse and the nursing home abuse statistics that were gathered from the report caused committee leaders and members to be shocked. The growing number of elders in the country will create an even larger challenge that has been placed on the nation as a whole to drastically and immediately reduce the nursing home abuse statistics.
If you or someone you love has been the victim of nursing home abuse, contact a nusing home abuse lawyer to learn your legal rights!
More Information on Nursing Home Abuse:
http://www.nursing-home-abuse-resource.com/care_center/nursing_home_statistics.html
More Information on Nursing Home Abuse:
» Elder Abuse in Nursing Homes
» Emotional Abuse in Nursing Homes
» Nursing Home Abuse
» Nursing Home Abuse Articles
» Nursing Home Abuse Laws
» Nursing Home Abuse Organizations
» Nursing Home Abuse Pictures
» Nursing Home Abuse Prevention
» Nursing Home Abuse Settlements
» Nursing Home Abuse Statistics
» Nursing Home Care
» Nursing Home Case
» Nursing Home Complaints
» Nursing Home Elder Financial Abuse
» Nursing Home Injuries
» Nursing Home Lawsuits
» Nursing Home Litigation
» Nursing Home Malpractices
» Nursing Home Neglect
» Nursing Home Negligence
» Nursing Home Ratings
» Nursing Home Reform
» Nursing Home Regulations
» Reporting Nursing Home Abuse
Learn more information on Nursing Home Abuse, click a topic below:
Nursing Home Abuse Pictures, Nursing Home Abuse Articles, Nursing Home Injury, Nursing Home Ratings, Nursing Home Lawsuit, Nursing Home Reform, Nursing Home Malpractice, Reporting Nursing Home Abuse, Nursing Home Negligence, Nursing Home Neglect, Elder Abuse in Nursing Homes, Nursing Home Regulations, Nursing Home Statistics, Nursing Home Abuse Settlements, Nursing Home Abuse Prevention, Emotional Abuse in Nursing Homes, Nursing Home Elder Financial Abuse, Nursing Home Abuse Laws, Nursing Home Abuse Organizations, Nursing Home Care, Nursing Home Case, Nursing Home Complaints, Nursing Home Litigation
Doctors Are The Third Leading Cause of Death in the US, Causing 225,000 Deaths Every Year ALL THESE ARE DEATHS PER YEAR:12,000 -- unnecessary surgery ,7,000 -- medication errors in hospitals ,20,000 -- other errors in hospitals ,80,000 -- infections in hospitals ,106,000 -- non-error, negative effects of drugs...
Whistleblower: Surgeon Breaks Cover Over NHS Beds Crisis
Specialist wards full to breaking point. Patients with serious injuries denied care. A health service paralysed by arguments about funding. Martin Bircher, one of Britain's most senior consultants, speaks out.
| Blue Label
We're urged to see our chemist about 'minor' ills but how safe is their advice?
Bringing home (the wrong) baby by Sandy Maple Nov 9th 2008 10:00AM
Like a lot of expectant parents do, 35-year-old Cristina Zahariuc purchased an outfit for her newborn baby to wear home from the hospital. So when it finally came time to bring little Ana Maria home, the hospital staff dutifully changed the newborn into her 'going home' clothes. The happy family returned to their Horlesti, Romania home and all was going well until Zahariuc unwrapped her little bundle of joy for her first diaper change. "Only when I got home and I invited some friends and the baby's godparents to see her did I notice my girl had a penis. I was paralyzed," said Zahariuc.
No, the hospital had not been mistaken about the sex of the Zahariuc's newborn baby - they had sent the new parents home with the wrong newborn baby. Apparently the little boy they were given had a very similar last name - Zaharia - and was situated in a cot right next to Ana Maria's.
Obviously, the confused parents immediately called the hospital where they were treated like pranksters. "It was very strange though. We were calling the hospital to tell them about the confusion and they were hanging up on us saying we should stop fooling around. They thought we were playing tricks on them," said new dad Constantin Zahariuc.
I guess all is well that ends well, but imagine how different things could have turned out. If the Zaharia infant had been a girl, there is a good chance the mix up might never have been detected. Tragedy averted thanks to a penis!
| Blue Label
Read the book, Death by Modern Medicine
, written by Carolyn Dean, MD, ND.
Violations Reported at 94% of Nursing Homes
Jill
More than 90 percent of nursing homes were cited for violations of federal health and safety standards last year, and for-profit homes were more likely to have problems than other types of nursing homes, federal investigators say...
++Please join our group on Care2.com…….
All Natural HealthWorks!
Join us as we work together to teach each other how to make use of various methods of natural healing and holistic health, such as herbs, natural foods, aromatherapy, prayer, massage, breathing techniques...anything not involving surgery or drugs.
The information presented is the author's personal and professional opinion, and is intended for educational purposes only. Nothing printed here is designed to take the place of a physician's advice. If you are experiencing problems with your health, it is recommended that you consult with a licensed health care professional. All Natural HealthWorks! is not responsible for any damages or ill-effects resulting from the information presented herein, nor do we make any recommendations regarding your health. We are simply here as a resource for you in making your own choices for your health yourself.
happy
Naturally Yours in Good Health,
"JODY....Vibraceous, ND" 
a-ok
Jody Eshelman, ND, CTN, CNHP, D.D.
hungry
on fire
happy
Jody Eshelman, ND, CTN, CNHP, D.D.
lazy
h!
, 
celebratory
ancient writings, it's there. 
Mary Jo Eshelman, ND, CTN, CNHP, D.D.