Mountain Home Personal Injury Lawyer - All Topics - Most Popular

Car Accidents & Trauma Induced Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Sach Oliver — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 09:40:00 GMT

Car accidents can cause trauma induced carpal tunnel syndrome. Carpal tunnel syndrome is pain, tingling, and other problems in your hand because of pressure on the median nerve in your wrist. The median nerve and several tendons run from your forearm to your hand through a small space in your wrist called the carpal tunnel. The median nerve controls movement and feeling in your thumb and first three fingers. Numerous medical journals and articles discuss how car accidents causes carpal tunnel syndrome.

According to Dr. Elliot L. Ames, carpal tunnel syndrome can result from acute injury, as indicated by a retrospective study. Symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome developed in 96 patients within 2 months after an automobile accident in a study conducted by Dr. Ames. Forty-four (44) of these ninety-six (96) patients underwent carpal tunnel release. It is postulated that the mechanism of injury is blunt trauma from the steering wheel or dashboard. (see Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Motor Vehicle Accidents, Journal of American Osteopathic Association, Dr. Elliot L. Ames, 1996)

Dr. Ames is a clinical assistant professor of surgery, division of orthopedic surgery, School of Osteopathic Medicine, Stratford, NJ. The carpal tunnel joint on the wrist are in close proximity as the hand grasps the steering wheel, and as a result, are vulnerable during impact. The injury can occur when the hand is braced on the steering wheel at the time of a front or rear-end collision. Because the base of the thumb can be injured by the steering wheel and the carpal tunnel is in close proximity, it is reasonable to calculate the carpal tunnel takes blunt trauma during impact.

To learn more about this topic read: Acute Median Neuropathy After Wrist Trauma: The Role of Emergent Carpal Tunnel Release by Gregory Mack, M.D., Scott McPherson, M.D., and Bruce Lutz, M.D. This article was published by Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research, 1994. In a nutshell, the article explains that acute carpal tunnel syndrome is caused by a sudden increase in carpal canal pressure that shuts down microcirculation to the median nerve. The most common etiology (cause) is hemorrhage caused by trauma.

Ultimately, do not be shocked to learn that a car accident victim is suffering from carpal tunnel syndrome. Also, do not be shocked if their symptoms do not show up immediately after the accident. For more free information or to ask questions to see if you need legal representation to fight the other person's insurance company, contact our firm.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Sach Oliver

Swine Flu and Hospital Acquired Infections

Frank Bailey — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:42:45 GMT

Swine flu confirmed in a Queens school…what next? Although these cases are mild, is it possible this virus could mutate much like the viruses have in antibiotic resistant strains? Remember MRSA, C. diff, and VRE.

President Obama has been getting regular updates on this virus and apparently the World Health Organization has warned countries around the world to be on the alert for any unusual flu outbreaks. According to Yahoo News, a deadly swine flu strain in Mexico has killed up to 81 people and likely sickened 1,324 since April 13. The CDC has confirmed 11 cases of swine flu in California, Texas and Kansas in addition to the cases in New York.

What concerns me, is that this outbreak is minor compared to the incidences of MRSA infections contracted every day in our hospitals and nursing homes for failure to follow guidelines as simple as washing hands between patients. What has to be done to get the attention of health care workers and stop the spread of these hospital acquired infections?

Are lawsuits the answer? Surely there has to be some other way to get the attention of the administration in our hospitals and nursing homes…

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Frank Bailey

Toyota Sudden Acceleration Danger

Frank Bailey — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:30:53 GMT

Sudden acceleration of Toyota vehicles presents a present danger to the American public. In a recent series of sudden acceleration cases it has become apparent that floor mats have caused a number of unintended accelerations accidents.

Toyota has recalled the floor mats. In announcing the recall Toyota stated, “Recent events have prompted Toyota to take a closer look at the potential for an accelerator pedal to get stuck in the full open position…A stuck open accelerator pedal may result in very high vehicle speeds and make it difficult to stop the vehicle, which could cause a crash, serious injury or death.”

But, there may be an even more insidious danger…the electronic throttle control in the Camry, Camry Solara, Lexus ES 300 and ES 330s, Sienna, Tacoma and RAV4 vehicles beginning in the 2002 model year. When Toyota installed a new electronic throttle control for these vehicles, the number of unintended accelerations reported has increased.

NHTSA has received over 100 reports of incidents where the accelerator in Toyota vehicles has become stuck.

If you have one of these vehicles, it is critical you observe the recall of the floor mats. If you experience a sudden unintended acceleration, what can you do to avoid a crash? I welcome input from those of you who know more about what to do than I do. It seems to me that fast clear thinking without panic while applying the foot brakes, taking the vehicle out of drive and putting it into neutral, and finally turning off the ignition might prevent injury or death in these types of cases…

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Frank Bailey

MRSA Attacks Skin

Frank Bailey — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 15:42:48 GMT

I have been blogging about MRSA for the last few weeks: MRSA: Can It Come From Food Animals . Today I thought my readers might want to see what MRSA can do when it attacks a person’s skin. This is just one of many pictures:

Photo credit: Gregory Moran, M.D.

I invite you to go to a webpage that will literally make your skin crawl when you see what these microbes can do. Why then aren’t our hospitals and nursing homes doing more to fight this terrible infection?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Frank Bailey

New Roof Crush Tests: Volvo XC90 vs. Ford Explorer

Frank Bailey — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:06:29 GMT

Beginning in 1970, the auto industry fought efforts by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to issue a dynamic roof crush standard that protects occupants in rollover crashes. Why would the auto industry take such a position?

During that time, the number of deaths to occupants in rollover crashes climbed from 1,400 to over 10,000 each year while total occupant fatalities declined from 43,200 to 33,300. What accounts for that amazing increase in deaths from rollover crashes?

Although numerous federal courts have upheld the dolly rollover test as a reliable dynamic test, NHTSA has stuck with the ineffective, quasi-static roof crush standard issued in 1971 even though it initially was to be phased out by 1977.

In other major crash modes, front and side impacts, NHTSA has issued effective dynamic crash test standards that have reduced death and serious injury, but why not roof crush tests?

Public Citizen now has the results of dynamic roof crush tests on the Jordan Rollover System (JRS). The tests were sponsored by the Santo Family Foundation on a Volvo XC90s. State Farm donated the vehicle. This is one time that I applaud State Farm for doing something right.

Ford Motor Company (Stock at $3.11 today) has obtained Protective Orders in 24 courts prohibiting the public from seeing the test. Wonder why? Roof crush tests show Volvo XC90 occupants escape serious injury in multiple rollover crashes while Ford Explorer occupants suffer serious injury.

In a multiple two roll test, the maximum roof intrusion in the XC90 was only 2.6 inches and the peak roof intrusion velocity was less than 4 miles per hour. In contrast, the Explorer had maximum roof intrusion of 11.5 inches and peak roof intrusion velocity of nearly 12 miles per hours. This exceeds known thresh holds for death or serious injury.

Examination of actual accidents from NHTSA shows only one Volvo XC90 in a rollover crash. Like the XC90 in the JRS test, this Volvo had minimal roof intrusion and the two occupants suffered no serious injury. In sharp contrast, the NHTSA files revealed multiple cases of severe roof crush in other vehicles that tested poorly in the JRS.

After 35 years of increasing rollover fatalities due to weak roofs and weak standards, it is time to issue a dynamic roof crush standard using the JRS to match the lifesaving dynamic standards NHTSA has for front and side impacts.

Call or email your representative today and ask that they put aside their love for the auto industry and start putting the safety of their constituents first.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Frank Bailey

The Negligent Doctor Protection Act

Frank Bailey — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:57:11 GMT

New efforts by the insurance industry to transfer the cost of caring for catastrophically injured Americans to taxpayers have surfaced. If the insurance industry is successful in its efforts to limit jury verdicts, it will no longer have to worry about insuring negligent doctors. Why? Because the taxpayers will pick up the tab for the doctor’s negligence. How will this work? Suppose a child suffers a brain injury due to the negligence of a physician. Who is going to pay for the cost of caring for that child for life with caps on damages…the taxpayers. Why? Because with a cap on the amount of money that child can receive for the human damages, there will not be enough money to provide for the care and assistance that child will need over a lifetime…The cap will only hurt catastrophically injured children and adults, but it will be devastating for them. I always though America took care of its sick and injured, but the insurance industry is trying to change that so it can make even higher profits…

Let’s look at what the Congressional Budget Office said Friday. A cap on pain and suffering damages would result in $4.1 billion a year saved out of a $2.5 trillion a year expenditure. I may be wrong in my division, but I believe that is less than one tenth of one percent savings. Is that worth transferring the care of the sick and injured away from the wrongdoer to the taxpayers. I think not.

We have to put a stop to this charade before someone in our community or family is caught up in the greed of the insurance industry. Contact your Senators and Congressmen and tell them to vote no to caps on jury verdicts.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Frank Bailey

Prevention of Hospital Acquired Infections in Central Line Catheters

Frank Bailey — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:22:26 GMT

A central line catheter is a catheter placed into a large vein in the neck, chest, or groin. It is used to administer medication or fluids. Certain medications, such as inotropes and amiodarone are usualloy given through a central line.

According to the CDC, each year, an estimated 250,000 cases of central line bloodstream infections occur in hospitals in the United States, with an estimated mortality of 12%--25% for each infection The marginal cost to the health-care system is approximately $25,000 per episode .

In 2001, the CDC was invited by the Pittsburgh Regional Healthcare Initiative to provide technical assistance for a hospital-based intervention to prevent central line infections among intensive care unit (ICU) patients in southwestern Pennsylvania. During a 4-year period, central line infection rates among ICU patients declined 68%, from 4.31 to 1.36 per 1,000 central line days. The results suggest that a coordinated, multi-institutional infection-control initiative is an effective approach to reducing hospital acquired infections.

The best prevention for hospital acquired infection is a patient who is not afraid to ask or question their health care provider. If you need a "central line" catheter, ask your doctor about the benefits of one that is antibiotic-impregnated or silver-chlorhexidine coated to reduce infections.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality recommends use of antibiotic catheters as one of its eleven patient safety practices. The Annals of Internal Medicine contains an excellent article on the prevention of hospital acquired infections; "Central venous catheters coated with Minocycline and Rifampin for the prevention of catheter-related colonization and bloodstream infections," Annals of Internal Medicine 127.4 (1997): 267-274.

Remember, patient safety starts with you.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Frank Bailey

MRSA And Your Life Update

Frank Bailey — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 09:16:01 GMT

MRSA. How would you like to die from a preventable infection you contracted while hospitalized for minor surgery? That is what is happening to thousands of people every year. Is it possible the CDC, a government agency that is supposed to protect people, is underreporting these infections?

According to the latest figures published by the CDC, 1,700,000 patients contract hospital acquired infections each year. But when you look at the numbers, the fastest growing, and one of the most difficult to cure, MRSA (methicillinn resistant Staphylococcus aureus), is growing by leaps and bounds. In 1993, there were only an estmated 2000 MRSA infections reported in American hospitals. Then in 2005 there were 368,000 reported cases. In 2007, according to the American Journal of Infection Control, 2.4 percent of all patients had MRSA infections. That would result in an amazing 880,000 victims a year.

But, let's look futher. MRSA only accounts for eight percent of hospital acquired infections according to Julie Gerberding, M.D., the director of the CDC. What about other superbugs such as VRE, (vancomycin resistant Enterococcus) and C. diff , (Clostridium difficile)?

These new facts discredit the CDC's official 1,700,000 estimate.

There are many applications of life saving changes that need to be implemented in our hospitals. MRSA screening is one. The test is a noninvasive simple skin test. At Evanston Northwestern Healthcare System, a group of three hospitals near Chicago, the screening reduced MRSA infections seventy percent! Dr. Lance Peterson, the study's lead author, stated, "If it works in these three hospitals, it will work anywhere."

NEW...More about the work at Evanston Northwestern Healthcare. Evanston received the John M. Eisenberg Patient Safety and Quality Award for its work.

MRSA infection rates were cut by 60% within the first year of the program. Universal MRSA surveillance has also decreased the risk of other patients and staff becoming infected. Peterson indicated that "The biggest risk for getting a MRSA infection is becoming colonized in the nose with it. Our program has successfully prevented nasal colonization of patients coming to ENH for their care. We want people to come here for their healthcare and not go home with something unexpected that will later cause an infection – and the program is successful in doing just that."

If your hospital doesn't do MRSA screening, ask why they aren't utilizing this safe proceedure to protect their patients. I would be interested in their answer.

What about screening healthcare workers? Can they be the main carriers?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Frank Bailey

Medication Errors

Frank Bailey — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 09:37:56 GMT

Medication errors injure over a million patients a year. Medication errors are by far the most common medical error. A report by the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, found than in any given week, 80% of U.S. adults take at least one medication. Almost one third take at least five different medications. The committee found at least one medication error per day occurred with each hospital patient.

The committee also found at least 25% of medication related injuries are preventable. The cost of these errors occurring in hospitals alone is estimated to amount to $3.5 billion a year. This does not take into account the human loss of life or the pain associated with these errors.

If President Obama wants to overhaul the medical system, he should start with preventing medication errors, in hospitals, nursing homes and clinics.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Frank Bailey

Rollover Deaths Are Preventable

Frank Bailey — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 17:18:37 GMT

Look at the number of innocent people killed each year on our highways…Over 30,000…of that number a staggering one-third are killed in light vehicle rollover accidents. Why is this happening?

We know manufactures are responsible for designing vehicles that provide occupant safety in rollover accidents. We know manufactures have the capability, yet they continue to put their head in the sand when it comes to rollover protection.

Rollovers are survivable if vehicles provide basic safety features. If a vehicle is struck from the front or side, the vehicle must absorb a tremendous amount of force within microseconds. A rollover is different. In a rollover energy is dissipated over longer time and distance with much lower forces on the occupants.

The defects that cause the staggering number of deaths in rollover accidents include; lack of adequate roof and pillar strength, seat belts that do not safely hold occupants in position, seat belts that unlatch, door locks and latches that fail and lack of side curtain air bags.

The legal basis for these claims against manufacturers is known as the crashworthiness doctrine. The doctrine provides that if a manufacturer’s negligence in design causes an unreasonable risk, the manufacturer is liable for injuries caused.

Manufactures have known since the early 1950’s about the importance of passenger protection in rollover accidents. Beginning in the 1950s General Motors, Chrysler, and Ford conducted rollover tests to identify how a vehicle’s structure would perform in rollover accidents.

In 1973 the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, under pressure from manufacturers adopted a pitifully weak standard. The standard FMVSS216 merely required that a vehicle’s roof resist a static force of 1.5 times the empty weight of the vehicle or 5,000 lbs whichever is less. The standard requires testing of only one front pillar, allowing force to be applied to the roof gradually over the pillar. This is a far cry from the actual forces applied in a rollover accident.

Currently, NHTSA is considering a revised rule that would extend the standard to vehicles weighing 10,000 lbs or less and increase the applied force to 2.5 times the vehicles unloaded weight and eliminate the current limit on the amount of roof crush. The proposed rule would require enough headroom to accommodate passengers in the 50^th percentile of American men.

This is a step in the right direction, but the new rule has a sneaky little provision that takes away our rights. We all need to contact our senators and congressmen and urge them to adopt this new rule and save thousands of lives WITHOUT THAT SNEAKY LITTLE CLAUSE PUT IN BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION THAT THE RULE WOULD PREEMPT ALL CONFLICTING STATE COMMON LAW REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING RULES OF TORT LAW. That little clause means that a jury no longer has the ability to determine what is unreasonable, the federal government has done that for us…no, the federal government did it for the big auto companies…

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Frank Bailey