The rise in technology has brought with it a rise in online services and solutions. One of the more recent rising trends is telemedicine. Most major television channels have some sort of  doctor program where celebrity doctors offer advice and services —”Dr. Phil,” “Dr. Oz,” and “The Doctors” are just a few examples. Due to the popularity of these medical shows, other providers and companies have been experimenting in the field of telemedicine and potentially exposing themselves to medical malpractice liability.

Insurance companies are some of the more recent telemedicine bandwagoners. Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, a Connecticut insurance company, offers an online forum called LiveHealth Online to connect patients and doctors. All the doctors who advise on the site are licensed to practice in the state; however many do not actually live and work in Connecticut. There is no guarantee that a user will talk to his or her own primary care provider or that he or she will even connect with the same doctor over multiple visits to the website.

Those who support online medical website and other telemedicine services say that it is similar to visiting a pharmacy versus a primary care provider; the goal is a quick consult for a minor medical problem. Many disagree with the comparison. At a pharmacy, a licensed pharmacist has an opportunity to physically examine any potential patients/customers, whereas the physical interaction is impossible in telemedicine. Opponents of the practice are concerned about the level of care that can be provided to a patient as well as continuity of care if a medical problem persists.

Because the risks of telemedicine include misdiagnosis, delayed diagnosis, and miscommunication, Connecticut state legislators are considering a bill that would limit the services provided through telemedicine. Senate Bill 467, if passed, would require that online doctors access medical records for each patient before making a diagnosis, as well as belong to a reputable medical practice that is held to the same accountability standards as traditional practices. Additionally, the bill would require that patients be made aware of the services and limitations of online medical treatment.

Telemedicine is a newer field and is thus not subject to the same medical malpractice rules and restrictions that limit other doctors and medical facilities. However, due to the absence of physical interaction, the risks for medical error can be even higher in telemedicine cases.

If you received treatment from a doctor, either online or in person, and believe a medical error or misdiagnosis occurred, please consult with a Westport medical malpractice attorney to discuss your case and options as soon as possible. We are proud to represent clients throughout Connecticut and we look forward to speaking with you.

There has been much movement—pushed along by the medical and insurance—to institute tort reform regarding a patient’s legal right to sue medical personal when treatment has caused injury or illness. This movement has included placing caps on the amount of non-economic damages, as well as placing stringent time limits on when an injured patient has to file his or her medical malpractice lawsuit.

Advocates for tort reform say it is necessary because there are too many false and/or frivolous lawsuits, causing medical and insurance costs to skyrocket. A new study, however, found there may be another way to cut down on the number of malpractice lawsuits that are filed—offer better medical care.

The study was conducted by researchers from Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Springfield, IL, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, Allscripts, Chicago, IL, and Griffin Hospital, Derby, CT. It was published in the American Journal of Medical Quality.

The research team used a hospital in Louisiana and a hospital in Texas to conduct their study. Both hospitals were owned by the same medical corporation. They chose those two locations because of the difference in tort reform which has occurred in those two states. During the time period from which the team took their data, Louisiana had not implemented significant tort reform; however, Texas had. In Texas, for example, attorneys have lost the ability to use contingency fees as compensation to represent injured clients.

Although there were no changes in tort reform during that time period in Louisiana, there were changes in the quality of care the hospital offered patients. This quality of care was based on the same 22 factors that Medicare uses to determine quality of care.

The study found that both hospitals had a reduction in malpractice claims, yet for different reasons. Therefore, this proved that the system does not need tort reform to decrease medical malpractice claims, but should instead be focusing on improving the care patients receive in hospitals and reducing medical errors which are one of the leading causes of patient injury.

If you have been injured or become ill because of medical treatment you have received, contact an experienced Westport personal injury attorney to find out what legal recourse you may have. Call Attorney Richard H. Raphael at 203-226-6168 for a free consultation.

Connecticut state laws that can affect a medical malpractice case are varied. Moreover, it can be confusing for some parties if they are exploring whether or not they might have cause to file a claim for medical malpractice or error. Like most states, Connecticut has a legal code that mandates a statute of limitations for a party’s eligibility to file a medical malpractice claim. However, there are exceptions that may apply to the statute of limitations depending on the circumstances of the case.

Standard Two Year Statute of Limitations

The standard deadline or statute of limitations gives a complainant two years to file a lawsuit. Missing the two-year window ends the ability to file a medical malpractice lawsuit unless one of the designated exceptions for missing the initial filing time period pertains to the case.

Discovery Rule Presents One Exception

The discovery rule applies as one of the potential exceptions to the initial or standard deadline. This rule pertains to situations where a complainant has not had the time or wherewithal to become aware that he or she might have a claim for the medical malpractice suit. In Connecticut, the discovery rule allows for the standard deadline of two years to begin once a party has had a reasonable amount of time to discover an injury related to the potential case of medical malpractice.

Other Exceptions

There are additional exceptions to the statute of limitations in Connecticut. Various circumstances of the case will potentially determine if a deviation from the statute limitations will be allowed. For instance, if a defendant moves to another state after the malpractice was committed or is found to have fraudulently concealed the malpractice, the statute of limitations may be modified.

Statute of Repose

Another element of the statute of limitations is known as the statute of repose. This is a definite deadline for malpractice suits to be filed, regardless of when a plaintiff discovered an injury that was caused by medical malpractice or error. In Connecticut, there is a three-year statute of repose for filing of medical malpractice claims—no matter when the injury was discovered.

In several states, a medical malpractice lawsuit will have a limit or cap on the total amount of compensation that can be recovered by an injured party. However, in Connecticut there is no such award of damages limit in a medical malpractice case.

Consult with a CT Medical Malpractice Attorney Today

If you suspect that you or a family member has been the victim of medical malpractice or error, please do not delay in consulting with a Westport personal injury attorney to discuss your case today. Attorney Richard H. Raphael has the knowledge and experience to manage your case so you can focus on recovery. Call 203-226-6168 today.