Search

Are you or your medical practice in Jeopardy? Learn why this could be (PART 3)


PART 3: Dismissing the Law.


Now that you know the importance of performing thorough neurological tests and always choosing the safest medical devices to execute your physical examinations, the only reason you or your practice could be in jeopardy would be not knowing the law and standards associated with sharp objects (OSHA) and possible malpractice claims, or worse: dismissing them. In this PART 3 of the “All the reasons why you or your practice are in jeopardy” series, we share the most important laws, standards, and malpractice claims around the use of sharp objects you need to keep an eye on:


OSHA


Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standard 29 CFR 1910.1030 (Bloodborne Pathogens Standard) requires sharp objects that have been in contact with blood or other potentially infectious materials to be disposed of immediately and safely into appropriate containers located as close as is feasible. In addition, you as a doctor or medical practice owner, must wear and provide protective equipment.



Congress required modification of OSHA's Bloodborne Pathogens standard (29 CFR 1910.1030) because exposure to bloodborne pathogens from accidental sharps injuries in healthcare and other occupational settings continues to be a serious problem. The act required to set forth in greater detail (and make more specific) OSHA's requirement for employers to identify, evaluate and implement safer medical devices (read Part 2 of this series to learn why you need to choose the safest medical device option for your practice). It also mandated additional requirements for maintaining a sharps injury log and for the involvement of non-managerial healthcare workers in identifying, evaluating, and choosing effective engineering and work practice controls. These are workers who are responsible for direct patient care and be potentially exposed to injuries from contaminated sharps. The Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act (the Act) (Pub. L. 106-430) was signed into law on November 6, 2000.


On the other hand, the “Centers for Disease Control and Prevention” (CDC) estimated in March of 2000, that more than 380,000 percutaneous injuries from contaminated sharps occur annually among health care workers in United States medical settings. Such injuries can involve needles or other sharps contaminated with bloodborne pathogens, such as HIV, HBV, or HCV. Depending on the type of device used and the procedure involved, 62 to 88 percent of sharps injuries can potentially be prevented using safer medical devices and involving staff in the device selection and evaluation process, particularly as new safer devices that eliminate or reduce exposure to bloodborne pathogens are introduced into the work setting. Do we need to say more? Make the switch now to your safest bet. Shop NAD Pinwheels here.


Possible Medical Malpractice Claims


Not only omitting a proper neurological examination could take you to court or get you a lawsuit. Causing your patients a punctured injury during examination with a metal reusable pinwheel is another way to get you there.


Here are three important elements that could prove negligence in a medical malpractice claim:


· Breach: if the standard of care was not followed by the doctor, another healthcare professional, or medical practice, then the duty has been breached.


· Injury: If the patient is capable of proving the punctured injury and/or infection gotten was the direct result of the breach of duty on the part of the doctor and wouldn’t have happened in the absence of negligence (in this case, using the reusable metal pinwheels, instead of a safer choice).


· Damages: If the injury or infection in question has caused the patient to suffer damages, economic, non-economic, or both.



After reading the “All the reasons why you or your practice are in jeopardy” series, it all comes down to this: The safest move against jeopardizing yourself or your practice is NAD Pinwheel Inc. Get NAD Pinwheel Inc. for your practice here.

0 comments