Pain Management and Provider Liability: No More Excuses

Author:

Furrow Barry R.

Abstract

Pain is undertreated in the American health-care system at all levels: physician offices, hospitals, long-term care facilities. The result is needless suffering for patients, complications that cause further injury or death, and added costs in treatment overall. The health-care system's failure to respond to patient pain needs corrective action. Excuses for such shortcomings are simply not acceptable any longer.Physicians have long been accused of poor pain management for their patient. The term “opiophobia” has been coined to describe this remarkable clinical aversion to the proper use of opioids to control pain. If the professional mandate of the health-care professional is to relieve suffering, then physicians are falling far short of their obligations by accepting myths about the use of opioids in the face of evidence to the contrary.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Health Policy,General Medicine,Issues, ethics and legal aspects

Reference221 articles.

1. 192. Herrara v. Lovelace Health Systems, Inc., 35 F. Supp. 2d 1327 (D.C.N.M. 1999); Hoose v. Jefferson Home Health Care, Inc., 1998 WL 114492 (E.D. Pa 1998) (with claims of vicarious liability and negligence in post-operative care, selection of therapists, and overall supervision of care, the court noted that “this case is nothing more than a medical malpractice case” and refused to uphold ERISA preemption).

2. 155. Strubhart v. Perry Memorial Hospital Trust, 903 P.2d 263 (Okla. 1995) (noting that twenty-two states have adopted some form of the corporate negligence doctrine); Albain v. Flower Hospital, 553 N.E.2d 1038 (Ohio 1990).

3. 71. See, e.g., Miles v. Tabor, 443 N.E.2d 1302 (Mass. 1982) (obstetrician's failure to initiate resuscitation of infant immediately after delivery violated American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines); Green v. Goldberg, 630 So. 2d 606 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993) (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists bulletin on breast cancer treatment used to support expert testimony); Basten v. U.S., 848 F. Supp. 962 (M.D. Ala. 1994) (involving American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines requiring that alpha-fetoprotein screening be offered and that acceptance or rejection be documented). See generally Hyams, et al., supra note 69, at 296–99.

4. 147. The case most identified with corporate negligence is Darling v. Charleston Community Memorial Hospital, 211 N.E.2d 253 (Ill. 1965). The Illinois Supreme Court relied upon several sources of standards to establish the standard of care for the hospital, including standards by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Heathcare Organizations for hospital accreditation, the state licensing regulations, and the defendant's bylaws. All of these sources mandated that a hospital assume certain responsibilities for the care of the patient. The court allowed the jury to use these standards to evaluate the failure of both the nursing staff and administrators to blow the whistle on the defendant's handling of the case.

5. 133. Sisters of Charity of the Incarnate Word v. Gobert, 992 S.W.2d 25 (Tex. App. 1997) (negligent failure of hospital to monitor patients' room, allowing a sexual assault to occur); Lamb v. Candler General Hospital, Inc., 413 S.E.2d 720 (Ga. 1992) (hospital negligent in failing to use proper replacement parts in a medical instrument).

Cited by 45 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3