In a panel on the impact EHRs have on malpractice claims, three lawyers discuss the usefulness of some features and the dangers of others.
Moderator: Sharona Hoffman
Professor, Case Western Reserve University
Michael S. Kelton, Esq.
Partner, Abrams Fensterman
Todd R. Bartos, Esq.
Shareholder, Stevens & Lee
Lori Abel Meyerhoffer, JD, MD
Partner, Yates, McLamb & Weyher, LLP
In this roundtable, panelists discuss what impact electronic health records (EHRs) have on malpractice claims and potentially reducing adverse events.
Moderator Sharona Hoffman, a professor of law and bioethics at Case Western Reserve University School of Law and the co-director of the university’s Law-Medicine Center, introduced the panelists: Michael S. Kelton, Esq., a partner at law firm Abrams Fensterman, and director of the firm's New York City Litigation Practice and the Medical Malpractice Defense Practice; Todd R. Bartos, Esq., a shareholder and defense trial lawyer working with physicians on risk management issues at Stevens & Lee law firm; and Lori Abel Meyerhoffer, JD, MD, a partner at Yates, McLamb & Weyher, LLP, who provides consultative services for physicians and hospitals to assist with risk reduction.
Kelton voiced doubts that EHRs result in any meaningful reduction in malpractice claims, but Bartos and Meyerhoffer highlighted EHRs features that create routine provide reminders and aid communication.
However, they all agreed that alerts and reminders need to be used carefully.
“I think it depends on the number of alerts and reminders that you get and how the physician utilizes that information,” Meyerhoffer said. “Obviously if everything is an alert and reminder then it’s not useful in clinical practice.”
Part 2 |
Part 3 |