Scalpel Weekly News

Week of: May 23, 2016

IN THE NEWS


Rare But Serious Skin Reactions Caused by Antipsychotic Medicine

On May 10, 2016, the FDA warned that the antipsychotic medicine olanzapine can cause a rare but serious skin reaction that can progress to affect other parts of the body. The FDA is adding a new warning to the drug labels for all olanzapine-containing products that describes this severe condition known as Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS). Click title to continue reading...


 
MEDICAL ALERTS


Antibiotic Use Restricted for Specific Infections; Side Effects

On May 12, 2016, the FDA advised that the serious side effects associated with fluoroquinolone antibacterial drugs generally outweigh the benefits for patients with sinusitis, bronchitis, and uncomplicated urinary tract infections who have other treatment options. Fluoroquinolone should be reserved for patients who do not have alternative treatment options. Click title to continue reading...



FDA Publishes Draft Guidance on 3D Printing of Medical Devices

On May 10, 2016, the FDA published its Technical Considerations for Additive Manufactured Devices Draft Guidance. The public may submit comments on the Draft Guidance until August 8, 2016. Click title to continue reading...



Former NFL Players Not at Increased Risk of Suicide

Retired National Football League (NFL) players are at no greater risk of suicide when compared with the general U.S. population, according to a new study by the CDC’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Click title to continue reading...


  CASE ALERTS


Second Eye Test Expert Testimony Admissible in Failure to Diagnose Retinal Detachment

A 41-year-old man presented to his optometrist because he had been experiencing blurred vision in his right eye for the previous three to four weeks. The optometrist examined the man’s eye. During the course of that exam, the optometrist employed five different diagnostic tests to determine the cause of the man’s blurred vision. The optometrist used an ophthalmoscope to examine the back of the man’s eye—including the retina, the macula, and the fovea—by performing what is known as a fundoscopy. At that point, the optometrist noticed that something was amiss: a “circumscribed elevation” in the macula of the man’s right eye that appeared to be filled with fluid. Click title to continue reading...



Expert’s Affidavit on Causation Contrary to Deposition; Laparoscopy After Bypass

A woman underwent a successful laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery. The woman developed complications from the surgery. The day after surgery, she had hypoactive bowel sounds, abdominal pain, nausea, and an inability to pass gas, and complained of these conditions throughout the day. The results of an abdominal x-ray and upper GI study were negative for obstruction. When the doctor who provided postoperative observation and treatment visited the woman, she was doing well and denied having nausea. She began complaining of nausea again at around midnight. Click title to continue reading...



Psychiatrists and Associations Lacked Standing to Sue; Reimbursement Discrimination

Two individual psychiatrists and three professional associations of psychiatrists sued four health insurance companies. The complaint alleged that the health insurers’ reimbursement practices discriminated against patients with mental health and substance use disorders in violation of the Mental Health Parity and Addition Equity Act of 2008 (MHPAEA), Pub.L. No. 110–343, Div. C §§ 511–12, 122 Stat. 3861, 3881, codified at 29 U.S.C. § 1185(a), and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001–1461, by systemically reimbursing providers of services to treat these disorders at a less favorable rate than for other healthcare services.  Click title to continue reading...


FEATURE


Documents: Hospital-Acquired Infection

As a special feature to our Premium subscribers we have included this feature containing discovery checklists for Document Requests in an action for hospital negligence or malpractice involving a patient’s hospital-acquired infection. Click title to continue reading...