Panel supports immunity for mammogram reading mistakes

http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040412/APN/404120993

Radiologists who make mistakes when reading a mammogram couldn't be sued for malpractice under a measure narrowly approved Monday by a Senate committee, despite concerns the bill could promote carelessness.

Supporters say the ability to get mammograms performed and read quickly is threatened because of the high cost of malpractice lawsuits. The American Cancer Society supports the bill (SB 2306).

Opponents said it essentially invites mistakes.

snip>

Debra Henley, deputy executive director of the Academy of Florida Trial Lawyers, said she called a mammogram provider Monday and was told she could get in Tuesday. Henley also showed the committee a newspaper ad taken out by a doctor who was quitting the practice - but was citing low reimbursement rates from insurers as the reason, not malpractice claims.

had one in summer of 88, questions so redone in 89

then biopsy - benign

found out then ca 60% + of Am women over 50 have at least one biopsy

would rather have biopsy and benign than no follow up

also from that time...understand that drs are 'check it out' rather than 'let it go'

as a woman, I appreciate that very much

I know he would never "slack off" just because he knew he wouldn't be held responsible. He takes his job very seriously. of course, i can't speak for all radiologists, just the ones i know.

I also fully understand the other side of the argument since the person's life is at stake. And my grandmother had a double mastectomy because of a positive diagnosis.

Seems to me the best way to handle it would be to have two mandatory readings. That way a life and death diagnosis isn't limited to one person's eyes, and preferably from a different practice. I would think the money saved from the lawsuits for malpractice and the malpractice insurance could easily cover the cost of second readings on all life and death diagnoses.

just rambling and thinking out loud... there has to be a better way than what we do now.

They won't think about the money saved from lawsuits when deciding on a sensible course of action. I think the RISK of lawsuits is far more likely to cause them to establish two mandatory readings, for instance. I hate any law that curbs malpractice suits. I don't think people are intentionally careless because of any law but it seems that it usually takes a major lawsuit to get companies to pay attention to problems that can easily be solved by establishing certain standard procedure.

I was only commenting on the person I know.

I think you are right that the risk is the thing that could get them to establish this procedure - but the two readings does make sense to me. I think that should be the case for every test that could result in a life threatening diagnosis.

It's almost insurance for the insurance companies. How many second readings on mammograms could be covered by avoiding a multi-million dollar lawsuit?

I hate these people!!!! What's the point in going if you can't be certain you're going to get a decent reading of your test? At my lst one the radiologist "read" it lickety-split ("you're fine") and sent me packing.

It's hard enough to get them to take it seriously when all they care about is grabbing your $150 for the x-ray and reading.

a DUer a while ago posted an article about how radiology was one of those professions targeted by outsourcing....

..so here we are with a bill to protect radiologists...

So there is the nightmare scenario. Dr Joe Radio decides to set up a radiology group...that group consist of himself and perhaps another Dr. Irma Ologist... They then find a group of lets say 20 radiologists in Bangalore who are willing to work for $18,000 a year and will read x-rays and mammograms 24 hours a day....
They rake in huge contracts from hospitals for their fast and speedy service....and then lo and behold...some of the people in Bangalore aren't radiologists...and then to our horror Radio and Ologist aren't actually QAing their work... and you have patients misdiagnosed out the ying yang.... but guess what ...no ability to sue.

http://www.enterblog.com/200302190355.html

http://www.imagingeconomics.com/supplements/rad_as_bus/1999_jul/contract.html

they single out a womens only issue?

...what does the victim get? Zip. The answer to these issues should be self insurance pools chartered by state law. Those who opt in don't need commercial insurance. Radiologists should be able to save at least 50 percent on premiums, if not more. A no fault scheme could be made up for women damaged by specified oversights or unfavorable outcomes on a no fault basis for payment from the pool administratively in lieu of lawsuits. This sort of remedy is within the purview of state government rather than federal. It is also constitutional because it provides an alternative to the common law right rather than just eliminating that right.

It is getting to be just another conduit for corporations to siphon $$ from the public with no risks to themselves.

Beancounters make the decisions about your care if you have insurance. If you don['t have insurance, pay til you run outta $$ then go off to die.

after you're broke you go to the medicaire people, hopefully you'll
survive and get back on your feet so they can drain your accounts again when you get sick again later.

I was under the impression that it wasn't the radiologists job to interpret test results, but rather the doctor who ordered the tests. I have never been involved in an imaging procedure where I could get the radiologist to tell me anything other than, "Your doctor will have to interpret these results".

a lot of X-rays, etc. are getting read abroad by Indian radiologists. Now we can't sue them.