If you’re involved in a life-threatening accident that requires immediate medical attention, then it’s imperative that you get to a trauma center as quickly as possible, and a new study suggests that you might be better off traveling by air than on the street.
The Journal of the American Medical Association has just published a study conducted by researchers at the University of Maryland School of Medicine which claims that accident victims with severe injuries are 1 to 2% more likely to survive if they’re transported to a trauma center via a helicopter rather than via an ambulance.
In compiling their findings, the researchers looked at 224,000 patients that had to receive treatments, 162,000 of which traveled in an ambulance. By taking the findings just at face value, ambulances come out on top, with an 89% survival rate versus an 87% survival rate amongst helicopters. But once researchers factored in age, distance away, likelihood of survival, and other factors, the numbers reversed themselves and helicopters came out on top.
Researchers are quick to point out that this shouldn’t be used as a blanket scenario, and that each case should be taken on its own merits depending on distance and time factors.
I found this study incredibly interesting as a car accident lawyer in San Diego. I regularly read stories about persons being rescued and transported to a hospital to receive injury treatments, but I never thought to consider which method of transport was safer. I hope as a San Diego personal injury lawyer that this research is the first step to saving the lives of accident victims all across the country.
A battle is shaping up between the makers of a medical device and a doctor who is saying that a defect in the device directly contributed to the death of more than 20 people.
In the March issue of the Heart Rhythm Journal, a medical journal, a doctor has written a report about St. Jude Medical Inc.’s Riata heart implant device. The findings published do not speak well of the product. Specifically, the report discusses a defect in the insulation that led to certain high voltage components short circuiting and triggering a failure of the device itself.
In 2011, the Riata and Riata ST leads for implantable cardioverter defibrillators were recalled. Now, though, the company that makes those devices, St. Jude’s, has asked that the new study be withdrawn from the print publication of the aforementioned magazine. They are claiming that the defect has been resolved, saying that no wiring problems exist at the moment. They point to their efforts to put additional coating on the wiring. According to St. Jude’s, this technique has solved any problems that may have taken place.
As a San Jose personal injury lawyer, I’ve seen a number of medical devices get recalled because of a defect that compromises the stability of the item and the safety of the individual. This is certainly one story I will be paying close attention to as a Ventura personal injury attorney.
The Food and Drug Administration might soon be imposing stiffer rules on a certain medical device.
It was announced today that the FDA would meet on June 27 and 28 to consider whether or not they should require metal on metal hip implants to face additional testing if such devices aim to gain approval by the organization. This comes on the heels of numerous complaints regarding the devices.
Many people have endured the failure of such devices over the past few years, leaving the implants with a reputation of having a higher than acceptable rate of failure. Devices made from other materials have not broken at the same rate.In fact, the National Joint Registry of England and Wales initiated a study which showed that 6% of recipients of a metal on metal implant device needed corrective surgery, compared with the more commonly accepted 2% that is normal with ceramics or plastics.
Last May, the FDA ruled that manufacturers needed to provide more data on these devices to demonstrate their safety. Studies have also shown that metal devices can increase the level of metal ions in the blood, which could pose a danger. The FDA wants more information about this scenario as well.
As a San Francisco personal injury lawyer, it grieves me to see an entire product line possibly do harm to the very people it was meant to help. I hope the FDA makes the right decision in their June meeting, but whatever their choice, the impact will most certainly affect many people, including a Long Beach personal injury lawyer like me.
A recall has been announced for an item that there’s already a shortage of thanks to a variety of other recalls.
Bedford Laboratories out of Ohio has issued a voluntary recall for three lots of cytarabine. This is used in the treatment of leukemia, and is a particularly popular chemotherapy drug due to its irreplaceability in fighting the cancer.
Following an investigation at the plant where the drug was made, Bedford has said that they are concerned about the sterility of these particular lots, which have an expiration date between March 2014 and May 2014. Production of the drug was previously halted due to a lack of required maintenance and testing of vital equipment. It was resumed earlier this year.
Last month, the Food and Drug Administration asked for cytarabine, Doxil, and preservative-free methotrexate to be made available through additional sources because of rampant shortages that resulted from recalls and issues with manufacture. Methotrexate is used to treat acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children, while Doxil is administered to women suffering from various cancers, including ovarian.
It saddens me as a personal injury lawyer in San Diego to think that certain life saving drugs might not be available, or that those drugs might have had a defect in the first place. As a Ventura personal injury lawyer, I hope everyone who needs the drugs is able to receive them.
According to news sources, the Food and Drug Administration has recently approved a medical device to help children suffering from heart failure that will reportedly to stay alive while a heart transplant donor can be found.
The device us called EXCOR Pediatric System and was developed by Berlin Heart for the purpose of fitting the different sizes of children, from newborns to teenagers.
The average waiting time for a donor heart in the U.S is about 119 days due to the limited amount of pediatric sized donor hearts available usually available. The percentage of children with heart diseases who lose their lives while waiting for a heart transplant is reportedly about 23 percent.
The EXCOR device is intended to relieve some of the symptoms associated with heart disease until a heart transplant can be found, thereby increasing the chances of survival. It reportedly functions by pumping blood through multiple tubes to the heart chambers.
As a personal injury lawyer Los Angeles, I am glad to see advances being made in the medical field that will help those suffering from debilitating injuries and illnesses. The conclusions of this innovative endeavor seem to suggest benefits to patients who suffer from heart disease. As a Los Angeles personal injury attorney, I hope that readers will find this information useful.
