Indiana Injury Law Blog

These are not findings that should surprise Indiana medical malpractice attorneys. It is a fact that hospital-acquired infections have a higher chance of spreading in congested surroundings with people in close proximity to each other. A new study out of Canada shows that patients in private intensive care rooms have a much lower risk of contracting hospital-acquired infections than those who are in general rooms.

Typically, about one in three patients contract hospital-acquired infection in the intensive care unit. The researchers in the study looked at 19,343 hospital admissions over a period of time before and after renovations were completed at the hospital. They specifically researched the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria: MRAS, VRE and c difficile. The researchers found that the infection rate among patients who were in private intensive care rooms was 54% lower after the general units were converted into private rooms.

The researchers have concluded that private rooms in intensive care facilities allow better infection control practices and minimize the transmission of infection-causing germs.
Of course, none of this should be taken to mean that private hospital intensive care units are the solution to hospital-acquired infection risks. There are other things that go into preventing hospital-acquired infections, including better handwashing practices among healthcare professionals, and sterilization of equipment, especially catheters. However, hospital designers need to take these lower infection rates from private rooms into account when they renovate or design healthcare facilities.

The benefits to patient safety from having private intensive care rooms seem to be substantial. There are other benefits to having private intensive care rooms. These rooms are private, less noisy, and offer privacy, possibly leading to a more comfortable patient, who recovers faster.

For Indiana product liability attorneys who monitor product safety issues, especially those related to children's products, this recall is yet another reminder of the progress we need to make towards complete safety for children. The Consumer Product Safety Commission and a company called Summer Infant Inc. have announced a recall of more than 1 million baby monitors with cords, after two reports of infant strangulation deaths.

According to the CPSC notice posted on its website, over the past year, the agency and the company have received two reports of strangulation deaths of infants who became strangled by the cords of the Summer Infant baby monitors. The first death occurred in March 2010, and involved a 10-month-old baby girl from Washington DC. She was found strangled in her crib from the electrical cord of the monitor. Then in 2010, the Consumer Product Safety Commission received another strangulation report, this time involving a six-month-old boy from South Carolina. He was found strangled by the cord of the monitor which had been placed on the changing table affixed to the crib. According to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, it was only last month that the agency found out that the baby monitors in both the cases were manufactured by Summer Infant.

Besides these two fatalities, the Consumer Product Safety Commission is also aware of at least one other near strangulation incident involving the Summer Infant baby monitor. In this incident, a 20-month- old boy was found with the electrical cord from the baby monitor wrapped around his neck. The baby monitor had been fixed on the wall, but the baby was still able to reach the cord and wrap it around its neck. Fortunately, caregivers were able to get to the baby in time.

These baby monitors were sold between January 2003 and February 2011. The CPSC is urging parents to monitor the location of the device, and make sure that the electrical cords are out of reach of the child. Besides, Summer Infant is also handing out instructions about how to mount the device safely and keep the cords out of an infant’s reach.

Driving at excessive speeds is a frequent factor in the truck accidents that Indiana truck accident lawyers come across. Indiana state police have confirmed that one person has been killed, and two people have been seriously injured in a truck accident on Interstate 94.

The accident involved three vehicles, and was triggered when a motorist driving a 2000 Chevrolet Cavalier lost control of his vehicle, and ended up facing south in the right lane. Just behind the Chevrolet was a Nissan Maxima which began to slow, after the Chevrolet lost control. The Nissan Maxima was struck by a semi tractor-trailer, and the impact pushed the Nissan into the Chevrolet. The passenger in the Nissan suffered serious injuries, and was rushed to the hospital. However, he had suffered massive internal injuries, and died later. The driver of the Nissan also suffered serious internal injuries, and was rushed to the hospital.

Indiana state police have cited the driver of the tractor-trailer for driving too fast for the prevailing road conditions. The tractor-trailer driver was not injured in the accident. A complete investigation will reveal the sequence of events that led to this accident fatality. However, according to the Indiana police, it does appear that the truck driver was driving too fast for the prevailing road, weather and traffic conditions.

Driving too fast does not only mean driving below the posted speed limits for. It also means driving at speeds that are appropriate, considering the traffic and weather conditions. For instance, a truck driver who is traveling in stormy winds, heavy rain or after heavy snowfall, will have to take extra precautions to avoid an accident. Whatever the kind of weather, this will include dropping speeds to retain control of the rig. Besides, a truck driver must also take into consideration traffic conditions. Speeds must be lowered if there's heavy traffic on the highway or during rush hour. That doesn’t seem to have happened here.

Indiana medical malpractice attorneys know that there are certain cases where an early delivery of an infant may be necessary to save the mother’s or infant’s lives. However, it appears that early elective deliveries - that is delivery before the 39-week gestation period is complete, without any medical reason- are widespread across the country.

The information comes from a study conducted by hospital safety advocacy group, Leapfrog. The organization analyzed early elective delivery information voluntarily submitted by more than 770 hospitals around the country. According to Leapfrog, 770 hospitals that voluntarily submit information to it exceeded the 12% target rate for early elective deliveries. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends that early deliveries not be conducted before the 39-week gestation period is complete, unless there are medical reasons for it.

As Indiana medical malpractice lawyers, we were astounded to find that the early elective delivery dates in some hospitals is as high as hundred percent. However, there are great variations in early elective delivery rates even in the same community. One thing is clear-there are far too many babies that are being delivered early without any need for such medical intervention. There are some situations in which medical intervention is needed to deliver the baby, as in cases where the mother is suffering from hypertension. In such cases, an early delivery is necessary for the health of both the mother and the child.

Early deliveries without medical reason could cause harm to the child. For instance, infants who are delivered too early could suffer from ill-developed liver and lungs, because these organs develop in the latter weeks of pregnancy. Besides, these infants are more likely to suffer from jaundice, and have respiratory difficulties. These infants also have trouble maintaining a steady body temperature, and may have feeding and latching issues.

A new study indicates that a popular drug that is often used in the treatment of cancer may also have beneficial effects in patients who suffer from spinal cord injury. The drug, Taxol has been in use for several years now, to treat breast cancer with successful results. Scientists, who have experimented with lab mice, have found that the drug has substantial benefits in mice with spinal cord injury too.
The researchers used low concentrations of Taxol on the site of the spinal cord injury. After about 6 to 8 weeks of the Taxol treatment, the researchers tested the mice on their ability to walk on sticks. Mice that have a spinal cord injury find it hard to walk in this manner because of increased missteps. However, after the Taxol treatment, the rats actually had fewer missteps and were able to walk better than rats that were not given the treatment.
It is not entirely clear how Taxol helps treat spinal cord injury. However, the researchers believe that it has something to do with the effect of the drug on the regeneration of axons. These axons are structures in nerve cells that are responsible for transmitting nerve impulses. After a spinal cord injury, the tissue around the spinal cord injury site can be covered with scar tissue, inhibiting the regrowth and regeneration of the axons. However, Taxol seems to reduce the amount of scarring that takes place at the spinal injury site, thereby allowing regeneration of the axons.
The good news for Indiana injury lawyers is that since Taxol is an approved drug, and has been used for several years as a cancer drug, the path towards using it as a spinal cord injury treatment is easier. However, Taxol cannot be used as a treatment for spinal cord injury on its own, and also will not be able to work on older injuries.