Insurances.net
insurances.net » Others » Doctor Confronted With Malpractice Claim After Not Performing Prostate Cancer Screening Requested By
Auto Insurance Life Insurance Health Insurance Family Insurance Travel Insurance Mortgage Insurance Accident Insurance Buying Insurance Housing Insurance Personal Insurance Medical Insurance Property Insurance Pregnant Insurance Internet Insurance Mobile Insurance Pet Insurance Employee Insurance Dental Insurance Liability Insurance Baby Insurance Children Insurance Boat Insurance Cancer Insurance Insurance Quotes Others
]

Doctor Confronted With Malpractice Claim After Not Performing Prostate Cancer Screening Requested By

Doctor Confronted With Malpractice Claim After Not Performing Prostate Cancer Screening Requested By

Prostate cancer impacts African-American males earlier and frequently more aggressively from the rest of the population

. Males of African-American descent are at greater risk of having prostate cancer at a younger age. Because of this, doctors mostly agree that physicians ought to go over prostate cancer screening wiith males of African-American descent when he turns forty-five. By starting earlier for African-American men screening has the potential of allowing for the detection of the cancer at an earlier and possibly curable stage. In cases where physicians do not follow the guidelines for cancer screening andtheir patient is subsequently diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer that physician may be liable for medical malpractice.

But beyond the guidelines, it might also be malpractice should a patient specifically ask for screening for a particular cancer and the doctor fails to do the tests. For example, in a published lawsuit the patient was an African-American man, age 41, who asked to be tested for prostate cancer. He asked for the screening test after participating in a campaign to increase awareness about the risk middle-aged African-American men face when it comes to prostate cancer.

There are two tests ordinarily employed to screen for prostate cancer. They are both done since they look for different indicators. The first is a physical examination of the prostate gland. The other is a blood test that measures the PSA level in the patients blood stream. As per the patients request the physician conducted a physical examination of the prostate. The doctor did not discover any palpable abnormalities on the prostate. The doctor then ordered blood tests. The tests, though, did not include a PSA test. The patient thought a PSA test was ordered and just believed that there were no abnormal results when he did not hear anything more about it. The patient was seen again by the same doctor 2 years later at which point the doctor failed to perform a physical examination of the prostate and just as before did not order a PSA test.

By conducting a physical examination of the prostate and ordering blood tests the doctor induced a scenario in which the patient believed that he had been correctly tested for prostate cancer and that the results had came back normal indicating nothing that would suggest he had cancer. Without doubt the patient considered the lack of any communication about the results to mean that the results must have been normal. This put him at ease with respect to whatever concerns prompted him to ask for the testing.

Move forward to later that same year. The patient goes back to the same medical practice but is seen by a different physician. This doctor both completed a digital examination and order a PSA test. The patient was diagnosed with prostate cancer with bone metastasis. Even though the guidelines generally recommend that African-American males be at least advised about screening for prostate cancer starting at age 45, which this patient was now turning, in this scenario the patient had specifically requested to be tested prior to that age.

The patient filed a malpractice claim against the doctor for the harm caused him by the delay in the diagnosis of his cancer. The law firm that took the case documented that it took the case to trail where a jury returned a verdict in the amount of $2,750,000 on behalf of the patient. The defense appealed and the parties settled for a confidential amount as the appeals was pending. Although the amount of the settlement was confidential it was less than the amount of the verdict. This is not an unusual way for both parties to reduce the risk of an adverse ruling by the Appeals Court. In this case the Appeals Court subsequently denied the appeal.

by: Joseph Hernandez
The Most Popular Tourist Attractions in Boston, USA How Celebrities Lose Weight Fast! Here Are Some Underground Secrets You Might Not Know Buying A General Purpose Centrifugal Pump Gardening with Kids Online Transcription Services- Technological Adaptively Vs. Manual Transcribing How To Make A Man Commit To You 2 Personalities To Cultivate Gout Treatment In Natural Ways Quick And Easy Insurance Quotes Can Be The Answer Proper Ways In Handling Online Store Website Enjoy Some Extra Special Easter Treats From The No 1 Brands 4 You Online Store HCG Protocol - A Manual to the HCG Diet Protocol Handbags Online Could Be The Source For A Number Of Great Bargains Bolivia Tour - Caporales Dance Tours
Write post print
www.insurances.net guest:  register | login | search IP(3.145.154.185) / Processed in 0.014140 second(s), 8 queries , Gzip enabled debug code: 12 , 3861, 975,
Doctor Confronted With Malpractice Claim After Not Performing Prostate Cancer Screening Requested By