Justia Lawyer Rating for Robert D. Kreisman

by

Yesterday, President Obama signed into law the house bill overhauling the United States’ healthcare system. Illinois’ Director of the State’s Department of Insurance will be at the center of overseeing changes that will affect Illinois citizens through the new bill, most of which involve insurance premium rates and eligibility.

One of the first changes that will affect Illinois residents is that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services now has the ability to review and challenge any unreasonable health insurance rate increase. For example, the insurance hikes like those proposed by Anthem BlueCross in California this past February of rate increase of up to 39% would definitely raise a red flag under the new Healthcare Reform Act.

While Illinois did require insurance companies to report any increases to premiums within the local market, the Illinois Department of Insurance did not have the authority to approve or deny rate changes. Likewise, in small-employer markets the Department of Insurance did not have any authority to authorize rate changes, nor was it automatically given any information about rate increases or premiums charged to individual companies. But now, with the new healthcare laws, Illinois’ Department of Insurance will receive reports on rate increases and promises to examine and challenge any unreasonable insurance rate increase.

Continue reading

by

A recent Cook County jury awarded a positive verdict to a 20 year-old man for severe brain damage that he sustained as a result of a Cook County birth injury. Given that a plaintiff has 8 years from the date of injury to file an Illinois birth injury claim, typically we see these lawsuits filed and settled well before the injured child reaches adulthood.
And while the age of the injured child at the time of the Cook County verdict might be unusual for a Cook County birth injury lawsuit, the case facts are fairly typical of an Illinois birth injury.

The Illinois birth injury lawsuit was brought by the plaintiff’s mother, who claimed that her son was born with severe brain damage as a result of negligence on behalf of Cook County Hospital. The plaintiff’s defense rested on claims that a delay on behalf of the hospital staff in delivering the baby was the cause of his subsequent brain damage.

Continue reading

by

Medicine is an area where new advances are being made on a regular basis that lead to better care and treatment for patients. However, this means that in some cases, patients who received older forms of treatment develop unforeseen complications, particularly in the area of Illinois defective medical devices. Consider the case of patients receiving metal-on-metal hip replacements. Once considered the norm, these types of hip replacements are now leading to an increase in problems for patients.

A recent editorial in The Journal of Arthroplasty, a medical journal for orthopedic surgeons, urge doctors to use metal-on-metal devices only with “great caution, if at all.” This comes on the heels of reports that metal-on-metal hip replacement procedures create tiny particles of debris that can damage soft tissue and bone.

Recent studies that estimated that anywhere from one to three percent of hip implant recipients could be affected by the problem, however, given the large number of people who have received metal devices the number could actually be dealing with thousands of patients in the United States who have been affected by defective medical devices.

Continue reading

by

A recent Illinois medical malpractice lawsuit involving a Chicago boy’s brain injury demonstrates the importance of timely medical care and treatment in order to avoid disastrous outcomes. In this case several treaters and physicians failed to recognize the baby boy’s signs and symptoms of severe dehydration, which caused the boy to develop cerebral palsy.

Ten days after the Chicago boy’s delivery his parents brought him to his pediatrician for a follow-up exam. The pediatrician was practicing at the Chicago Family Health Center, a federally funded community health clinic. At the time of the baby’s visit his body weight was noted to have dropped by 23% from his birth weight.

At that visit the pediatrician also detected a heart murmur on exam, so referred the baby to a pediatric cardiologist. This appointment was made for a month later and the boy and his parents were sent home.

Continue reading

by

The Archives of Internal Medicine released a new report revealing that roughly 48,000 people a year in the U.S., including patients in the state of Illinois, are killed as a result of pneumonia and sepsis caused by hospital-acquired infections. Not only did this take an obvious toll on the survival rate of patients nationwide, but it also increased U.S. healthcare costs by $8.1 billion within a single year. Some of these Illinois cases could have been the result of Illinois medical malpractice or Illinois nursing negligence.

Both pneumonia and sepsis are caused by potentially deadly microbes, which includes the well-known Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), an antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Sepsis is a potentially lethal, systemic response to infection wherein the body’s bloodstream is overwhelmed by bacteria, that can eventually lead to massive organ failure. Pneumonia is an infection limited to the lungs and respiratory tract that can also be fatal. The study reports that it analyzed 69 million discharge records from hospitals in 40 different states.

The increase in hospital costs is mostly due to the fact that patients who acquire pneumonia or sepsis in the hospital typically require longer stays and more care than those who don’t. For example, the study found that patients that developed sepsis after surgery were hospitalized 11 additional days than those patients who did not develop sepsis, which increased the hospital costs by $33,000 per patient. And for those patients who acquired pneumonia after surgery, their hospital stay was lengthened an additional 14 days, leading to additional costs of $46,000 per patient.

Continue reading

by

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that it is working with other entities to launch The Initiative to Reduce Unnecessary Radiation Exposure from Medical Imaging. The purpose of the initiative is to promote safer use of all relevant medical imaging devices, to support and increase the degree of clinical decision making, and to further patient awareness.

This initiative is part of a growing movement to increase the safety of life-saving diagnostic and therapeutic radiation and prevent Illinois radiology errors from occurring. The FDA has promised to take steps towards increasing its regulatory supervision of some of the more powerful forms of medical radiation, including fluoroscopy, CT scans, and nuclear medicine.

Some of these forms of radiology can deliver enough radiation in one exposure to equal almost 400 chest x-rays. Obviously with scans this powerful it is important that the medical community is making informative decisions as to the appropriateness of their use and practicing safe administration of these tests.

Continue reading

by

An Illinois medical malpractice case recently was settled, avoiding an Illinois jury trial regarding the death of an Illinois man with undiagnosed bladder cancer. The Illinois medical malpractice lawsuit revolved around the urologist who allegedly failed to diagnose the man’s bladder cancer in a timely manner.

The case calls to mind the importance of securing a timely diagnosis in Illinois cancer cases, where just a few months delay may result in drastic differences in the cancer’s staging and in the patient’s chance of a positive outcome.

In this particular case the man had first been referred to the urologist for a second opinion regarding continued complaints of urinary tract difficulties. The defendant doctor determined that the man’s symptoms were behavioral, meaning that they had more to do with the patient’s mental state than with his physical state. In light of this diagnosis, which was later found to be unfounded, the doctor decided that these symptoms did not present any risk to the patients lower or upper urinary tracts.

Continue reading

by

As patients we trust that our doctors are operating in our best interests rather than their own. Furthermore we expect to be treated not as dollar signs, but as people.
Unfortunately a recent Cook County medical malpractice case that came before an Illinois Appellate Court demonstrates that this is not always the reality. In Martinez v. Elias, et al., No. 1-08-0265, the plaintiff claimed that an orthopedic surgeon performed unnecessary surgery on his back and was motivated to do so for financial gain.

The trial jury agreed with the plaintiff and found against the defendant surgeon. The defendant doctor appealed the case on the claim that the trial court had erred in allowing the admission of evidence of the surgeon’s financial motive for the surgery. However, the Illinois Appellate Court disagreed with the defendant and affirmed the Cook County medical malpractice verdict.

Continue reading