Four years follow a massive explosion in Texas City, OSHA fined BP a record $87 million dollars.
The Financial Times reports:
"Jordan Barab, acting assistant secretary of the labour department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration, said that in spite of Lord Browne being replaced as BP chief executive after the blast, BP continued to violate US safety regulations under the leadership of Tony Hayward.
“There are some serious systemic safety problems within the corporation,” Mr Barab said.
“That there are so many life-threatening safety problems at this plant means there is still a systemic problem.
To read more about OSHA click here.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Thursday, October 29, 2009
NIOSH: H1N1 Flu Is A Serious Risk to Healthcare Workers
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has declared that 2009 H1N1 Influenza poses a serious risk for healthcare personnel. With at least 4 deaths of nurses being reported in the media, NIOSH has stepped up its efforts to gather and analyze the prevalence of illness and fatalities among health workers.
"Healthcare personnel are at increased risk of occupational exposure to the 2009 H1N1 virus based on their likelihood for encountering patients with 2009 H1N1 illness. In contrast to seasonal influenza virus, 2009 H1N1 influenza virus has caused a greater relative burden of disease in younger people, which includes those in the age range of most healthcare personnel. For some healthcare personnel, this higher risk of exposure and illness may be compounded by the presence of underlying illness which places them at higher risk of serious flu complications, such as asthma, diabetes, or neuromuscular disease. Of particular concern to the healthcare workforce, which is largely female, is the fact that pregnant women are among those groups considered to be at higher risk of severe infection from 2009 H1N1."
Congressional Hearing to Examine OSHA's Review of Nevada Program
The U.S. House Education and Labor Committee will hold a hearing on Thursday, October 29 to examine the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s critical review of Nevada’s workplace health and safety program. OSHA reviewed Nevada’s health and safety program between January 2008 and June 2009 and found a number of deficiencies with the plan. A spate of accidents drew national attention during the city’s building boom that killed 12 construction workers on the Las Vegas strip over an 18-month period between 2006 and 2008.
Full Committee Hearing
10:00 AM, October 29, 2009
2175 Rayburn H.O.B
Washington, DC
Watch live testimony click here.
Full Committee Hearing
10:00 AM, October 29, 2009
2175 Rayburn H.O.B
Washington, DC
Watch live testimony click here.
Witnesses:
- U.S. Sen. Harry ReidNevada
- Jordan BarabActing Assistant Secretary of LaborFederal Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- Debi Koehler-FergenMother of worker killed at the Orleans Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas
- Don JayneAdministrator
Nevada Division of Industrial RelationsDepartment of Business and Industry - Franklin MirerProfessor of environmental and occupational healthHunter College of the CityUniversity of New York
Additional witnesses to be announced
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Latex Allergy Adverse Reaction Caused by Swine Flu Shot
Latex allergy claims have long been held compensable in workers' compensation courts throughout the country. The original claims arose out of exposure to latex protein in gloves that came into use as a result of the AIDS epidemic.
A case of latex allergy reaction has been reported in Australia during a vaccination program. While the vaccine and the vial are supposedly latex free, the packing material may not be, and that may have trigger the reaction. One in 100 people are thought to have an allergy to latex.
Reactions to latex may be mild or transitory or may be a permanent sensitization causing hives, shortness of breath, total disability and possible death.
For more articles on Workers' Compensation and the Flu Pandemic click here.
To read more about compensable latex allergy claims click here.
Workers Compensation Insurance Company and PBMs Liability for Drug Abuse
The Wall Street Journal reports today about a claim against pharmacies as a result of customer drug abuse. In the State of Nevada a case is pending that may confer liability upon a drugstore for the consequences of an accident caused by patient drug abuse. A pharmacy dispensed narcotic painkillers to a Patricia Copening, 35 year old doctor's office receptionist, who killed a 21 year old man in a fatal Las Vegas accident.
A case is pending against the seven pharmacies (Wal-Mart, Longs Drugs, Walgreen Co., CVS Pharmacy, Rite-Aid, Sav-On and Lam’s Pharmacy) that dispensed 4,800 tablets of the drug for Copening in the 13 months prior to the fatal accident.
The Nevada Prescription Controlled Substance Abuse Task Force had notified the pharmacies that Copening was “taking an unusual amount of these narcotics.” The vehicle causing the accident was commercially owned by a physician who was involved in a relationship with the driver.
The Nevada Supreme Court will be deciding whether the pharmacies, previously dismissed by the trial court, are liable because they dispense enormous amounts of drugs to Copening that resulted in drug abuse and resulting the fatal accident.
Where the perimeter of liability may end is unknown. Workers' Compensation insurance companies and their integrated pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) dispense many narcotics, on an ongoing basis, for pain relief, to injured workers. The courts may ultimately deem them unprotected by the "exclusivity rule," and they, as ultimate wrongdoers, may become targets for these tragic yet foreseeable events.
To read more about drugs and workers' compensation click here.
A case is pending against the seven pharmacies (Wal-Mart, Longs Drugs, Walgreen Co., CVS Pharmacy, Rite-Aid, Sav-On and Lam’s Pharmacy) that dispensed 4,800 tablets of the drug for Copening in the 13 months prior to the fatal accident.
The Nevada Prescription Controlled Substance Abuse Task Force had notified the pharmacies that Copening was “taking an unusual amount of these narcotics.” The vehicle causing the accident was commercially owned by a physician who was involved in a relationship with the driver.
The Nevada Supreme Court will be deciding whether the pharmacies, previously dismissed by the trial court, are liable because they dispense enormous amounts of drugs to Copening that resulted in drug abuse and resulting the fatal accident.
Where the perimeter of liability may end is unknown. Workers' Compensation insurance companies and their integrated pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) dispense many narcotics, on an ongoing basis, for pain relief, to injured workers. The courts may ultimately deem them unprotected by the "exclusivity rule," and they, as ultimate wrongdoers, may become targets for these tragic yet foreseeable events.
To read more about drugs and workers' compensation click here.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
HIPPA Privacy Modifications Under Presidential Emergency H1N1 Flu Order
Under the emergency declaration for H1N1 flu signed by President Obama on October 24, 2009, the HIPPA Privacy rule is not waived according to Federal HHS interpretation; however, "the Secretary of HHS may waive certain provisions of the Rule under the Project Bioshield Act of 2004 (PL 108-276) and section 1135(b)(7) of the Social Security Act."
Those modifications are:
"If the President declares an emergency or disaster and the Secretary declares a public health emergency, the Secretary may waive sanctions and penalties against a covered hospital that does not comply with certain provisions of the HIPAA Privacy Rule:
1. In the emergency area and for the emergency period identified in the public health emergency declaration.
Those modifications are:
"If the President declares an emergency or disaster and the Secretary declares a public health emergency, the Secretary may waive sanctions and penalties against a covered hospital that does not comply with certain provisions of the HIPAA Privacy Rule:
- the requirements to obtain a patient's agreement to speak with family members or friends involved in the patient’s care (45 CFR 164.510(b))
- the requirement to honor a request to opt out of the facility directory (45 CFR 164.510(a))
- the requirement to distribute a notice of privacy practices (45 CFR 164.520)
- the patient's right to request privacy restrictions (45 CFR 164.522(a))
- the patient's right to request confidential communications (45 CFR 164.522(b))
1. In the emergency area and for the emergency period identified in the public health emergency declaration.
2. To hospitals that have instituted a disaster protocol. The waiver would apply to all patients at such hospitals.
3. For up to 72 hours from the time the hospital implements its disaster protocol.
"When the Presidential or Secretarial declaration terminates, a hospital must then comply with all the requirements of the Privacy Rule for any patient still under its care, even if 72 hours has not elapsed since implementation of its disaster protocol.
"Regardless of the activation of an emergency waiver, the HIPAA Privacy Rule permits disclosures for treatment purposes and certain disclosures to disaster relief organizations. For instance, the Privacy Rule allows covered entities to share patient information with the American Red Cross so it can notify family members of the patient’s location. See 45 CFR 164.510(b)(4)."
Monday, October 26, 2009
Denial Rates: An Insurance Company Tactic That Compounds the Health Care Delivery Problem
As Congress considers changes in the nation’s health care program, US health insurance companies continue to be scrutinized. The methodologies of how insurance companies deny claims are being investigated.
A certified nurse assistant, Amelia Mendoza, age 52, of West Covina, California, was attacked twice in the same week by a patient while working at Huntington Hospital in Pasadena earlier this year. Amelia suffered injuries that resulted in her suffering a stroke in April, falling into a vegetative state and contracting pneumonia. The hospital insurance carrier cut off medical care for her, forcing her from the hospital, and leaving her family responsible for medical care for Amelia’s work-related injury that is the hospital’s responsibility.
Her husband, Ralph Mendoza, who met with reporters and supporters outside the hospital, commented, “I am shocked and extremely disappointed that Huntington Hospital would treat Amelia this way. Amelia gave her all to her job for more than six years, and she deserves better….Amelia was injured doing her job, and the hospital has avoided its responsibility for months. I watch my wonderful wife, a mother of four children, slip away in a vegetative state and I wonder whether she would be healthy today if the hospital had met its responsibility. I want the medical care that my wife deserves.”
After an attack by a violent patient, Amelia was examined in the hospital’s Emergency Room and told to return to work. After a second attack just two days later, Amelia went to the Emergency Room and was told to go to Huntington Hospital’s in-house workers’ compensation clinic. The hospital was aware that Amelia’s blood pressure was dangerously high after the attack, and that the patient had infectious diseases. The hospital even called Amelia and her husband to warn of the health dangers Amelia faced. Yet the hospital’s clinic turned Amelia away, saying they were too busy to see her. Amelia suffered a stroke less than three hours later. The attacks had caused bleeding in her brain.
“The workers’ compensation carrier, Sedgwick, has denied liability for Amelia’s medical care, claiming that their investigation did not support a claim of injury and no medical evidence supports the claim either,” said Amelia’s attorney, Chelsea Glauber of the Glauber/Berenson Law Firm. “Medical evidence does in fact exist which states in no uncertain terms that Amelia’s condition was caused by these attacks at work. Amelia is trapped in a horrible hell, between two insurance companies trying to avoid responsibility. So Huntington Hospital let Amelia go home, in a vegetative state, to be taken care of by her husband, who no matter how loving and well intentioned, is not qualified to provide the critical care that Amelia needs and deserves. What does it say about these insurance companies and a hospital that they would treat a hard-working human being in this awful manner?”
A recent report on insurance companies denial rates reveals that, “When it comes to claim denials, insurers may be putting profits ahead of patients’ best interests. Most major insurance companies have reassigned their medical directors—the doctors who approve or deny claims for medical reasons—to report to their business managers, whose main responsibility is to boost profits.”
An inefficient system is not helpful to anyone, including injured workers, insurance companies, and employers. Wasteful administration should be curbed. The U.S. healthcare system wastes between $505 billion and $850 billion every year, recently reported Robert Kelley, vice president of healthcare analytics at Thomson Reuters.
Lawmakers must concentrate the U.S. health debate on how the delivery of medical care can be more efficient and effective. Delays and denials presently occurring in the workers’ compensation system continue to highlight the fact that injured workers need a universal health care system.
A certified nurse assistant, Amelia Mendoza, age 52, of West Covina, California, was attacked twice in the same week by a patient while working at Huntington Hospital in Pasadena earlier this year. Amelia suffered injuries that resulted in her suffering a stroke in April, falling into a vegetative state and contracting pneumonia. The hospital insurance carrier cut off medical care for her, forcing her from the hospital, and leaving her family responsible for medical care for Amelia’s work-related injury that is the hospital’s responsibility.
Her husband, Ralph Mendoza, who met with reporters and supporters outside the hospital, commented, “I am shocked and extremely disappointed that Huntington Hospital would treat Amelia this way. Amelia gave her all to her job for more than six years, and she deserves better….Amelia was injured doing her job, and the hospital has avoided its responsibility for months. I watch my wonderful wife, a mother of four children, slip away in a vegetative state and I wonder whether she would be healthy today if the hospital had met its responsibility. I want the medical care that my wife deserves.”
After an attack by a violent patient, Amelia was examined in the hospital’s Emergency Room and told to return to work. After a second attack just two days later, Amelia went to the Emergency Room and was told to go to Huntington Hospital’s in-house workers’ compensation clinic. The hospital was aware that Amelia’s blood pressure was dangerously high after the attack, and that the patient had infectious diseases. The hospital even called Amelia and her husband to warn of the health dangers Amelia faced. Yet the hospital’s clinic turned Amelia away, saying they were too busy to see her. Amelia suffered a stroke less than three hours later. The attacks had caused bleeding in her brain.
“The workers’ compensation carrier, Sedgwick, has denied liability for Amelia’s medical care, claiming that their investigation did not support a claim of injury and no medical evidence supports the claim either,” said Amelia’s attorney, Chelsea Glauber of the Glauber/Berenson Law Firm. “Medical evidence does in fact exist which states in no uncertain terms that Amelia’s condition was caused by these attacks at work. Amelia is trapped in a horrible hell, between two insurance companies trying to avoid responsibility. So Huntington Hospital let Amelia go home, in a vegetative state, to be taken care of by her husband, who no matter how loving and well intentioned, is not qualified to provide the critical care that Amelia needs and deserves. What does it say about these insurance companies and a hospital that they would treat a hard-working human being in this awful manner?”
A recent report on insurance companies denial rates reveals that, “When it comes to claim denials, insurers may be putting profits ahead of patients’ best interests. Most major insurance companies have reassigned their medical directors—the doctors who approve or deny claims for medical reasons—to report to their business managers, whose main responsibility is to boost profits.”
An inefficient system is not helpful to anyone, including injured workers, insurance companies, and employers. Wasteful administration should be curbed. The U.S. healthcare system wastes between $505 billion and $850 billion every year, recently reported Robert Kelley, vice president of healthcare analytics at Thomson Reuters.
Lawmakers must concentrate the U.S. health debate on how the delivery of medical care can be more efficient and effective. Delays and denials presently occurring in the workers’ compensation system continue to highlight the fact that injured workers need a universal health care system.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)