New York Medical Malpractice Facts and Statistics

January 20th, 2015

Tort Reform Increases the Risk of Medical Negligence

New York is one of just 15 states in which there is no limit on the maximum amount of compensation after an incident of medical malpractice causes damage. However, this does not mean lawmakers have not tried in the past to impose restrictions.

According to Syracuse.com, for example, Governor Andrew Cuomo proposed imposing a $250,000 limit on the amount of pain and suffering damages. This capped amount is similar to limits in other states such as California. medical stethoscope 2

A New York medical malpractice lawyer knows proposals to cap damages after incidents of medical negligence are common. Those who believe damages should be capped state  they are in favor of “tort reform,” and argue imposing limits would lower healthcare costs for everyone since doctors would no longer need to pay as much for medical malpractice insurance to cover costly claims. The reality, however, is  malpractice damage caps only serve to prevent those who have been harmed by doctors from getting the money they deserve. Furthermore, as the Huffington Post indicates in a recent article, damage caps can actually make healthcare worse for everyone.

Damage Caps Can Make Healthcare Worse

A variety of recent studies have assessed the impact damage caps have on the healthcare field and outcomes for patients. The studies all seem to lead to the conclusion that damage caps are detrimental to patient health without providing the promised benefits. For example:

Get The Full Story
http://www.jcreiterlaw.com/posts/tort-reform-increases-the-risk-of-medical-negligence

The Law Firm Of Jonathan C. Reiter

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Medical Malpractice and Drug Recall Issues March 4th

March 26th, 2012

Shire is taking aim at Johnson & Johnson’s ($JNJ) Concerta. The Irish drugmaker is sponsoring two head-to-head trials pitting its ADHD drug Vyvanse against the J&J product as a treatment for adolescents with the disorder. But it’s not just J&J’s branded product in Shire’s sights. Generic versions of Concerta are already on the market, and if Shire can’t make a better case for Vyvanse, then it stands to lose sales to those cheaper rivals.

Head-to-head trials are always a gamble; just think of AstraZeneca’s ($AZN) Crestor-vs.-Lipitor trial, Saturn, in which the AZ drug failed to beat Pfizer’s ($PFE) on the primary endpoint. Or Merck’s test of Vytorin against Zocor in Enhance, which also backfired. Shire does have some indication Vyvanse could edge out Concerta. It recently wrapped up an 8-week Vyvanse trial with a Concerta reference arm, and even though the study wasn’t designed to compare the two drugs–it was placebo-controlled–“the data do suggest … further investigation,” the company said in a statement. See : medical malpractice attorneys napa

One of the planned trials will be dose-optimized, and the other will use a fixed-dosing schedule. Together, they’ll comprise 1,000 patients, with results forthcoming by the second half of next year. “These studies are important to further our understanding of the possible differences in efficacy between Vyvanse and Concerta in treating adolescents with ADHD,” Dr. Jeffrey Jonas, senior VP of R&D, said in a statement.

For 2011, Vyvanse turned in $805 million in sales. Concerta brought in $1.4 billion in 2010, its last full year without generic competiton. Besides looking for an edge in ADHD, Shire is studying Vyvanse as an add-on treatment for depression, and it’s pushing the drug into new markets, with a regulatory filing in Europe (under the brand name Venvanse) and a launch in Brazil (also as Venvanse).

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter