Delay Between Clearance and Surgery

FOCUS

Did the 9-month delay between the stress test for clearance prior to elective knee surgery constitute negligence?

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing elective joint replacement often require cardiology consultation for preoperative clearance. Although cardiology expert witnesses opine in a variety of areas, only a cardiology expert witness who routinely performs preoperative evaluations can opine on the applicable standard of care.

CASE

A 66-year-old woman was scheduled to undergo elective bilateral total knee arthroplasty. As part of her preoperative clearance, she saw a cardiologist who performed a nuclear stress test. For various reasons, nearly nine months lapsed prior to her actual surgery. The patient was cleared for the operation, but during surgery she suffered a cardiac arrest. She was eventually resuscitated though the anesthesiologist had difficulty establishing an airway. She survived with an anoxic brain injury. The plaintiff law firm contacted Elite Medical Experts to secure a leading cardiology expert witness to determine what occurred. Elite also recommended an anesthesiology expert since the anesthesiologist had an independent duty to assure that the patient was stable for surgery. Consequently, the firm required an anesthesiology expert witness to evaluate the patient’s intraoperative anesthesia care and resuscitation.

ELITE’S ROLE

Our free physician-level case consultation identified the need for both a cardiology expert witness and an anesthesiology expert witness. Elite refined the case strategy and worked with the firm throughout discovery.

THE MEDICAL EXPERTS

Elite quickly secured a hand-vetted Professor of Cardiology from a major medical university. The cardiology expert witness was specifically chosen due to extensive experience with preoperative clearance. Elite also secured a leading Professor of Anesthesiology from a different US university. Between the two, the experts had 133 publications, book chapters, and presentations.

OUTCOME

The cardiology medical expert determined that the preoperative clearance was adequate and that is was incumbent upon the anesthesiologist to realize that the interval between evaluation and surgery had been too long. The anesthesiology expert witness agreed. Reports were written by both the cardiology expert witness and the anesthesiology expert witness. The case settled for an undisclosed amount.

Looking for the right team of experts for your case? Contact Elite Medical Experts today and speak to a physician or nurse case strategist to discuss your case.

E-Case Studies are brief clinical vignettes based upon actual cases handled by Elite medical Experts. Identifying information has been redacted or altered to protect case confidentiality.

Did an Inmate’s Care Constitute Negligence and Contribute to his Premature Death?

Focus

Did the lack of monitoring and treatment of an inmate’s pacemaker and hypertension constitute negligence and contribute to his premature death?

Background

Hypertension is a leading cause of heart disease, but heart disease can occur for a variety of reasons. Only a skilled cardiology expert witness can distinguish between various causes. This case was also complicated by the alleged medical negligence occurring in a correctional medicine facility. The client needed an experienced correctional medicine expert witness to opine upon the applicable standard of correctional medicine care.

Case

A 62-year-old correctional inmate had a history of diabetes, congestive heart failure, pacemaker placement, and coronary artery disease. While incarcerated, he died of hypertensive heart disease. The family of the decedent alleged that the inmate was not under appropriate medical observation and that there was a failure to monitor his pacemaker and to treat his hypertension. They were also concerned regarding the development of progressive renal failure noted on a lab test prior to his death. A defense law firm contacted elite medical experts on behalf of the correctional system. The defense firm was in need of a cardiology expert witness to determine whether any alleged breach of the applicable standard of care actually caused or contributed to the man’s death. The defense firm also required a correctional medicine expert witness to opine on the standard of care for the correctional medicine aspect of the case.

Elite’s Role

Our complimentary case consultation distilled the need for two experts: a cardiology expert witness and a correctional medicine expert witness. Elite’s physician-led team immediately secured a cardiology expert witness with expertise and publications in hypertensive heart disease. Elite also secured an expert witness who was an experienced professor of internal medicine (the same specialty as the defendant physician) with current practice in correctional medicine.

The Medical Experts

A top cardiology medical expert was hand-vetted to the specific needs of this case. The cardiology medical expert was a full-time professor of cardiology at a major Texas medical university and the author of numerous publications and clinical trials. The correctional medicine medical expert was also a top-tier professor who oversaw the correctional medicine program at three correctional facilities.

Outcome

The cardiology medical expert witness was able to quickly determine that the inmate’s hypertension was chronic and that short-term intervention would not have altered the course of the disease. The correctional medicine expert witness supported the care administered by the correctional medicine team. Although the inmate’s blood pressure was not optimally controlled, it was adequately controlled and appropriately monitored. The defense prevailed on both standard of care and causation.

Looking for the right team of experts for your case? Contact Elite Medical Experts today and speak to a physician or nurse case strategist to discuss your case.

E-Case Studies are brief clinical vignettes based upon actual cases handled by Elite Medical Experts. Identifying information has been redacted or altered to protect case confidentiality.

 

Did a Failure to Prescribe Anticoagulation Result in a Stroke?

Focus

Did a failure to prescribe Anticoagulation result in a stroke?  A case requiring review by a Cardiology Expert Witness.

Background

Atrial fibrillation is a common medical condition with complex treatment options. Medical malpractice cases regarding atrial fibrillation frequently require cardiology medical expert witnesses.  A leading cardiology medical expert is the key to success in these difficult cases.

Case

A 32-year-old man with atrial fibrillation was under the care of a cardiologist who referred him to a cardiac electrophysiologist for permanent pacemaker placement.  While under the care of the cardiac electrophysiologist (“EP specialist”), he was never instructed to take aspirin or any other anticoagulant therapy.  Several months later, while awaiting pacemaker placement, he suffered a debilitating stroke resulting in left-sided hemiparesis. The client contacted Elite Medical Experts to secure a leading cardiology medical expert witness.

Elite’s Role

As a part of our case consultation, our internal physician-led team realized that the scope of this case fell outside of the realm of a general practicing cardiology medical expert. The client required a clinical cardiac electrophysiology medical expert to independently review the medical records in order to determine what occurred as only an electrophysiology medical expert could analyze the requisite standard of care.  The role of the electrophysiology medical expert would be able to determine whether the actions of the treating electrophysiologist deviated from the applicable standard of care.

The Medical Expert

A top electrophysiology medical expert was hand-vetted to the specific needs of this case.  The electrophysiology medical expert was a professor of clinical cardiac electrophysiology (“ep specialist”) from a major California medical university. The expert had 74 major publications and had authored 16 textbooks chapters.

Outcome

The electrophysiology medical expert was able to quickly distill the relevant clinical issues though it was ultimately determined that the patient did not require anticoagulation due to a low CHADS-2 Score, an anticoagulation risk stratification tool for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.  The CHADS2 score and its updated version, the CHA2DS2-VASc score, are clinical prediction rules for estimating the risk of stroke in patients with non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation (AF), a common and serious heart arrhythmia associated with thromboembolic stroke. Such a score is used to determine whether or not treatment is required with anticoagulation therapy or antiplatelet therapy.  The CHADS2 score is simple and has been validated by many studies.

The expert contacted the client to provide an oral opinion on the merit of the claim.  The claim was subsequently dropped and the client was satisfied with the knowledge that his stroke did not occur as the result of negligence.

 

Looking for the right team of experts for your case? Contact Elite Medical Experts today and speak to a physician or nurse case strategist to discuss your case.

E-Case Studies are brief clinical vignettes based upon actual cases handled by Elite Medical Experts. Identifying information has been redacted or altered to protect case confidentiality.

Interventional Cardiology: Essentials for Attorneys

Given the widespread prevalence of heart disease in the US population, issues related to cardiology occur in countless medical negligence cases. Consequently, in the realm of medical expert witnesses, the Interventional Cardiology expert witness is King.

Interventional Cardiology is a subspecialty of cardiology relying upon highly specialized cardiac procedures to diagnose and treat coronary artery disease. Cardiologists who employ these techniques to intervene in the course of coronary artery disease are known as Interventional Cardiologists. Since Interventional Cardiologists have expertise in both the diagnosis and interventional treatment of cardiac disease, issues addressed by Interventional Cardiology expert witnesses may focus on standard of care, breach, and/or harm. Interventional Cardiology experts also opine upon standard practices involving billing, compliance, resource utilization, and observation v. admission status.

Standards of care relate to the principles, practice, and procedures of Interventional Cardiology. The most frequent Interventional Cardiology procedure is angioplasty, also known as Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, or PCI. During PCI, an Interventional Cardiologist inserts a catheter into an artery and then threads the catheter to the level of the heart. The target artery is one or more coronary arteries perfusing the heart. The Interventional Cardiologist monitors the location of the catheter by injecting dye and viewing real-time images during the procedure. When a coronary artery is determined to have significant narrowing due to atherosclerosis (plaque), the Interventional Cardiologist will perform an “angioplasty”, literally reshaping the interior of the blood vessel. The angioplasty catheter uses a tiny balloon to press plaque against the luminal walls of the artery, effectively opening the internal diameter and improving blood flow. In 70% of angioplasty procedures, the Interventional Cardiologist will also deploy a stent. Stents are tiny metal tubes that remain in place to permanently reinforce the artery wall.

The same PCI techniques of vascular entry and guidewire insertion form the foundation for nearly all Interventional Cardiology procedures. Other procedures include:

Atherectomy: The use of tiny devices such as burrs or lasers to physically remove plaque from coronary arteries.
Balloon Valvuloplasty: The use of balloon catheters to physically open narrow heart valves (e.g. aortic stenosis).
Percutaneous Valve Repair: The use of specially equipped catheters to repair abnormal heart valves.
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR): TAVR is a revolutionary non-surgical treatment for aortic stenosis. During TAVR, the Interventional Cardiologist deploys a prosthetic aortic valve that is instantly deployed over the patient’s native valve. The native valve is entirely displaced while the new valve functions in its place.

The most common standard of care allegations include procedural delays, particularly during the treatment of acute myocardial infarction. Other allegations may involve procedural complications such as hemorrhage (e.g. hematoma or retroperitoneal hemorrhage), vessel rupture, nerve injury, device malfunction, embolism, and stroke. Given the complexity of interventional cardiology procedures, only a Board-Certified, full-time practicing Interventional Cardiology expert witness can opine upon the applicable standard of care.

In additional to opining on standard of care, an Interventional Cardiology expert witness is often required to address causation. Causation arguments may arise when an Interventional Cardiologist is alleged to have acted negligently. In other words, did the alleged malpractice result in harm? Interventional Cardiology experts also evaluate causation when a patient suffers a deprivation of care by not being referred to an Interventional Cardiologist in a timely manner. For example, allegations may arise when a primary care provider fails to refer a patient with chest pain, or when an Emergency Medicine specialist delays admission to the cardiac catheterization lab. Such situations mandate meticulous analysis, and only a credible and independent Interventional Cardiology expert witness can connect the dots.

Since Interventional Cardiology experts are also Cardiologists, IC experts are also called upon to determine the existence, nature, extent, and prognosis of cardiac harm. For example, when a patient suffers a myocardial infarction (i.e. heart attack), what is the extent of the injury and how will it impact the patient’s health? Investigating the status and degree of cardiac harm is an essential strategic element is many cases. Once again, a skilled and impartial Interventional Cardiology expert witness will be the key to your case’s success.

In countless areas of medical litigation, from billing and compliance to percutaneous coronary angioplasty, the Interventional Cardiology expert witness plays a pivotal and irreplaceable role. To succeed in your next cardiac case, contact Elite to find the right Interventional Cardiology expert witness today.

How To Select A Medical Expert Witness: Mission-Critical Steps for Success

The expert witness is the foundation of any medical malpractice case. From analyzing the elements of negligence to testifying at deposition and trial, your strategic success depends upon competent medical insight. Given the pivotal role played by medical expert witnesses, it is surprising how often the search for an expert is left to chance. Choose incorrectly and you’ve made a common and costly mistake that may prove fatal to your case. Secure the right expert, however, and you’ll build a solid strategy and partnership from the outset. Rather than leaving the decision to chance, the following steps will immediately improve your chance of success:

Assure Board Certification

For medical malpractice cases, your expert must be Board Certified by the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS). Although other “boards” exist, only ABMS is universally recognized as the official certifying body governing all medical and surgical specialties. The key is to choose an expert whose ABMS certification and active practice identically match the issues in the case.

Know Your Expert

Perform a background check to learn about credentials, experience, prior testimony, and conflicts of interest. Confirm that your expert was in full-time clinical practice, with a spotless professional record, both before and during the time of the alleged negligence in the case. Before agreeing to proceed, speak with your expert to assure that he or she is a good match with your personal style and case requirements. Since the expert has not yet been formally retained, use the time to meet the expert rather than ask case-specific questions. Knowing that your professional relationship with an expert may span a period of years, invest the time to vet your candidates closely.

Avoid Referral Services

Expert witness referral services rely upon preexisting lists of professional experts. These services simply match the medical specialty required by your case (e.g. Cardiology) with a random expert (e.g. Cardiologist) from a predetermined list. Rather than hand-selecting unique experts with qualifications, interests, and expertise chosen for your specific case, referral services are really selling you a random name from a list of subscribing experts. Experts on referral lists typically have suboptimal credentials, advertise on the internet, and can be located without using a referral service at all. A better strategy is to rely upon established consulting firms, ideally staffed by physicians and nurses, who utilize their resources to locate and hand-vet specific experts uniquely suited for your case. Such experts are true experts, typically serving at the professorial level at major medical universities. Professors of Medicine and Surgery have top-tier credentials and never advertise their expert services. Since university experts are generally inaccessible to the public, you will require assistance in securing an ideal candidate for your case. Only trust reputable and recommended firms with established success working for both sides of the bar. Such firms utilize proven practices that respect the critical importance of transparency and discoverability.

Build a Winning Relationship

The key to winning your case is a rock-solid theory supported by an articulate expert. Start that relationship by relying upon your expert’s honest and independent interpretation of the medical facts. Provide all documents, theories, and questions that you wish, but then let the expert do the work of determining whether the facts support the requisite elements of negligence. If the expert’s opinion is positive, take the time to understand every facet, including strengths, weaknesses, and the likely theory of any opposing expert. If the opinion is negative — a common occurrence in randomly screened plaintiff cases — take a similar amount of time to understand the flaws in your case theory. Although the natural inclination is to feel disappointed, experienced attorneys recognize that a well-reasoned negative opinion saves vast amounts of money and time. When you can confidently rely upon your expert, any opinion holds tremendous value.
Bottom line: Maximize your return on investment and winning success by securing an optimal expert witness early in your case.

How To Find A Medical Expert: Pearls and Pitfalls

Attorneys are surprisingly creative at finding their expert witnesses. From trusted sources to personal friends to the physician who performed their last colonoscopy, no “expert” seems out of bounds. Given the critical influence that your expert will have upon your case, a well-chosen expert will save the day while a haphazardly selected expert may be a disastrous and expensive misstep. Despite the vast resources available today, many still ask, “How do I find a medical expert?” When it comes to choosing a medical expert witness, understanding these Pearls and Pitfalls of your options is critical to your success.

The Internet

The internet is ripe with an unfiltered and unlimited list of physicians “ready to testify” in your next case. Although there may be some excellent candidates within the mix, too many internet experts are “hired guns” with spotty credentials and questionable clinical experience. Even if you interview a multitude of candidates and happen to stumble upon a reasonable choice, he or she is still an advertised “expert” whose internet presence will no doubt be an endless source of fascination for opposing counsel.   The bottom line is that random internet searches are typically too broad, unstructured, and risky to yield meaningful and cost-effective results.

Friends & Family

Although Friends & Family may work for your cellular calling plan, it is the worst of all strategies for securing a medical expert witness. Beyond the obvious conflict of interest, informal referrals lack the experience and objectivity that any rational approach demands. Litigation is too costly and complex to rely upon an informal referral. Skip friends and move on to other more credible resources.

Prior Experts

When you have a good relationship with an expert, it is certainly reasonable to reach out to him or her when another suitable case arises. The key to this strategy is to assure that the expert is really the best expert in terms of expertise, credentials, and availability. It is equally important to assure that the expert is not seen as an asset of your firm in terms of an ongoing relationship. This may be accomplished by limiting the number of cases referred to the expert and also by documenting a history confirming that the expert is not always in lockstep with your theories.

Colleague Referrals

A tried and true expert can be an outstanding resource, and reaching out to colleagues may be a good way to find one. Although the pool is quite limited, if you can match Board Certification, expertise, and current clinical practice, then you may have a an effective resource at your disposal.

Referral Services and Bureaus

Utilizing the help of professionals is often a good way to find experts, but like the internet, the realm of referral services and expert bureaus is fraught with potential risks. Rather than utilizing services that work with a laundry list of preselected experts, look for an experienced and reputable consulting firm that takes the time to learn about your case before conducting an independent search for an ideal expert witness. Since the expert is hand-vetted for your specific case, the expert has no ongoing relationship with the firm. Such firms are often run by experienced physicians with extensive legal experience whose loyalty is to your case rather than to a predetermined subscribing “expert”. Top tier firms only utilize Board Certified experts with spotless credentials, the majority of whom are on the faculty of major university medical centers. These firms understand discovery, respect transparency, and never advertise the name of any expert.

Regardless of the path you take, a remarkable expert capable of advancing the case theory will be the cornerstone of your success.  If you need additional assistance, have questions, or need start-to-finish litigation support for your next case, please don’t hesitate to contact us.

Causation: The Key Element of Oncology Litigation

All successful medical negligence claims require four cardinal elements: duty, breach, harm, and causation. In oncology litigation, however, the element of causation assumes paramount importance. The reason is that many tumor processes are lethal within a defined period of time independent of brief delays in diagnosis or debatable errors in treatment. This fact often forms the foundation of solid defense theory though it frequently blind-sides an ill-prepared plaintiff.

The key to utilizing a causation argument is to first fully understand the specific characteristics of the tumor. These tumor traits determine how aggressively a tumor will attack its host which in turn dictates the overall prognosis. The most relevant tumor-specific characteristics are identity, stage, and doubling time.

The tumor identity is the most important trait since it determines the overall prognosis. Benign tumors (e.g. cerebral meningioma) are typically non-aggressive, less invasive, and not prone to recurrence. Malignant tumors (e.g. squamous cell lung cancer) typically attack in an aggressive and invasive fashion, often with a tendency to metastasize and recur. Although imaging studies may provide compelling evidence of the presumed tumor type, only a tissue biopsy analyzed by a pathologist can determine the specific identity.

Tumor stage is another critical prognosticator that essentially describes how aggressively the tumor has behaved. There are numerous staging systems for specific tumor types, though the most common system for the staging of solid tumors is the TNM system. “TNM” (standing for Tumor, Nodes, Metastases) describes the size of the tumor, the involvement of nearby lymph nodes, and the presence of tumor that has spread from the original site. In general, “favorable” tumors are those identified at an early stage — small size and no spread beyond the tumor itself.

Doubling time, a measure of how quickly a cluster of tumor cells doubles in mass, is another key factor in determining prognosis, thought it is not necessarily calculated for many tumor types. When determined, it does provide insight into how aggressively a tumor may behave.

In litigation, tumor identity, staging, and doubling time all come into play in building or defending a causation argument. For example, if a specific tumor type has a dismal prognosis (e.g. pancreatic cancer), then a delay in diagnosis may have been inconsequential. If a tumor already presented in an advanced stage with metastasis, then an error in management may not necessarily affect the outcome. If a tumor has a defined doubling rate, then it may be possible to extrapolate forward or backward to determine the stage of the tumor at various points in time — a critically important task that can make or break causation.

Only an experienced, Board-Certified oncology medical expert witness can credibly evaluate these complex variables. Without a thorough understanding of the oncologic basis of causation, it is impossible to develop a strategic plan or to predict the outcome of a cancer-based claim.

To learn more about Oncology and Oncology expert witnesses, you may view our Oncology Expert page.

To consult with an ELITE physician or nurse about your next Oncology case, please feel free to contact us at any time for a complimentary consultation.

Critical Facts You Need to Know About Hospital Medicine Liability

Hospital Medicine is a branch of medicine dealing with acute patient care, teaching, and research, all within a hospital-based healthcare system. Consequently, Hospital Medicine focuses upon variables that are unique to hospital settings rather than specific diseases or demographics. The term Hospitalist refers to hospital-based physicians who care for hospitalized patients. This differs from other primary care providers who maintain an office-based practice while also following their own hospitalized patients. Hospitalists admit patients to the hospital, administer day-to-day care, write orders, obtain consultations, perform quality assurance, and coordinate patient discharge. In this capacity, Hospitalists are the “primary care providers” for hospitalized patients.

With over 30,000 active practitioners, HOSPITAL MEDICINE is one of the fastest growing areas of medical practice. Despite its exponential growth, the field of HOSPITAL MEDICINE is so new that it was only recently recognized as a focused area of practice by the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS). The burgeoning need for Hospitalists and the lack of formal training programs means that there are very few Hospitalists who have formal fellowship training in Hospital Medicine and even fewer who hold formal certification. This statistic will improve as more universities open fellowship training programs, but in the meantime most Hospitalists enter practice directly from backgrounds of Internal Medicine, Family Medicine, or Pediatrics.

While numerous studies have confirmed the benefits of Hospital Medicine in terms of patient throughput and resource utilization, the Hospitalist-model of healthcare also exposes providers and their institutions to new and evolving areas of litigation risk:

1. Impaired Continuity of Care: By definition, Hospitalists care for the patients of other providers. By participating in the continuity of care between patients and their primary providers, there is an inherently heightened risk of error. For example, a Hospitalist may not be privy to a patient’s full medical history, outpatient test results, or recent medication changes. Since Hospitalists focus upon the details relevant to a patient’s acute hospitalization, there is also less time and incentive to delve into complexities. In addition, there is less of a doctor-patient bond since the Hospitalist’s interaction is tightly focused and limited to the immediate hospitalization. Each of these factors add risk to an already challenging dynamic.

2. Increasingly Complex Patients: The current demand to treat more patients in outpatient settings means that when a patient does get hospitalized, he or she is typically quite ill. This is particularly true in light of the fact that medical problems — from resistant infections to multiple organ transplants — are more complex than ever. Although Hospitalists do have the benefit of obtaining consults from other specialists, delays may ensue when a consultant is unavailable or when time is consumed while the Hospitalist evaluates the need for seeking consultation. Furthermore, as diseases and therapy become more complicated, it is nearly impossible to keep abreast of the latest treatments for every conceivable challenge that a Hospitalist may face. In some cases, this means that the Hospitalist will inevitably be a generalist serving in a specialist’s domain. There is no doubt that this adds to liability, but high-risk cases will always be an unavoidable part of the Hospitalist’s job.

3. Shiftwork and Transfer of Care: One of the allures of Hospital Medicine is the fact that it is performed in scheduled shifts. While shiftwork means that Hospitalists enjoy a more predictable schedule, it also means that the care of their patients is divided into shifts that are covered by different medical providers. Whenever patient care is “checked out” to another provider, there is always a risk that some relevant fact will get missed or delayed. This may occur as a natural result of human error, or it may happen when a new Hospitalist receives a quick check-out and views himself or herself as a placeholder until the first Hospitalist returns. Both situations may result in harm that is further complicated by issues of apportionment of liability.

4. Paucity of Defined Standards of Care. Given the novelty of Hospital Medicine as a separate specialty, there are relatively few resources for codified standards of care. Of course, Hospitalists must follow the generally accepted standards of Internal Medicine and/or Surgery, but the specific standards of day-to-day Hospital Medicine are less defined. In addition to hospital-specific policies, textbooks such as Wachter’s Hospital Medicine, and McKean’s Principles and Practice of Hospital Medicine, are excellent resources for admission guidelines, patient care, consultation, and hospital discharge.

5. Utilization of Mid-Level Providers: Like most physicians, Hospitalists are often overburdened. Reduced staffing hours, high patient censuses, and increased administrative demands all take valuable time away from direct patient care. Consequently, many Hospitalists now work with mid-level providers such as Physician Assistants to fulfill their clinical duties. While PA’s are a valuable and trusted resource in all medical fields, risk is inherently increased when patient care is divided amongst multiple providers.

While the use of Hospitalists will continue to grow, the focused and episodic nature of Hospital Medicine will always have an elevated level of medicolegal risk.

To learn more about Hospital Medicine and Hospitalist expert witnesses, you may view our Hospitalist Expert page.

To consult with an ELITE physician or nurse about your next Hospital Medicine case, please feel free to contact us at any time for a complimentary consultation.

Critical Steps to Organizing a Medical Record

An organized medical record is the cornerstone of any negligence case.  Since the record is the most important material upon which your expert will rely, proper data preparation is instrumental to your success.  Adhering to these rules will reduce your cost and improve your success by allowing your expert to readily access key information in the most time-effective manner:

  1. Collect all medical records and maintain them in their original order.  Perform Bates numbering if possible. Do not place any other notes or marks on the records.
  2. Print all records and place them in a 3-ring binder.  Label the spine of the binder with your firm’s name and the name of the case.
  3. If PDF is available, it may be included as a supplement to the printed volume.  PDF is never a preferred format since it precludes the expert’s ability to quickly identify pertinent pages and sections.  Remember:  When reviewing records, time is money.
  4. Index the printed records by placing a tabbed divider between major sections.  Major sections are defined as medical records unique to a specific provider or institution.  If pleadings or other documents are included, include them under their own tab at the back of the binder.
  5. Sub-indexing is not necessary, though it may be performed within major sections.  For example, tabbed dividers within major sections may identify dictated reports, laboratory data, imaging studies, orders, nursing records, etc.
  6. Once the records are bound and indexed, prepare a Table of Contents identifying major sections and subsections.  Print the TOC on office stationery and insert it as the first page so that the expert has all of your contact information at the front of the binder.
  7. The final step is to prepare a cover letter to provide a road map for record review.  The cover letter should summarize general facts and outline key names, dates, and places.  Within the cover letter, you may include additional information such as event timelines, tabular data (e.g. laboratory results), case theories, and specific questions.  Any discoverable information may be included, though a standard disclaimer is warranted: The case summary and timeline is furnished as a courtesy and is not intended to substitute for your full and impartial case review. In the rare event that an unforeseen conflict of interest is identified, ask the expert to close the file and contact you.
  8. Provide a specific deadline by which the records must be reviewed, and give a direct phone number at which the expert may reach you.

Your time and your expert’s time are both important. A properly prepared medical record is the key to maximizing your case potential. When you work with Elite you not only get leading medical experts, you receive strategic consulting from our in-house team of physicians or nurses throughout the entire case. Contact us today to find the right medical expert for your case.