Patient data losses are up nearly one third (32%) in 2011. While most medical practitioners have back up data that they can access for your care, more than half admit that they do not know where the patient information they lost is physically located. It could be on a stolen smartphone, iPad, laptop, or other electronic device, for example, that has not yet been found and may never be recovered.

To make matters worse, many healthcare organizations admit that they do not require security measures, such as passwords, on mobile devices.

As a patient, it is important to know that these potential security breaches could cause you harm if they fall into the wrong hands. If you are concerned about the privacy of your medical records then be sure to speak to your doctor about efforts to safeguard your private medical information.

Earlier this month, the United States Supreme Court announced that it would hear a case concerning the constitutionality of the health reform law known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Several issues are expected to be considered by the Court including whether it is constitutional to require individuals to have health insurance by 2014 or pay a penalty.

The Circuit Courts of Appeals are currently divided on the issue of mandatory health insurance.

Oral arguments are expected in the spring of 2012 with a decision likely prior to the November 2012 presidential election.

Pennsylvania, like many other states, is regularly looking at tort reform options.  Those who support tort reform argue that it is necessary to cap noneconomic damages in medical malpractice lawsuits in order to keep healthcare costs in check and to encourage doctors to practice medicine in state.

Texas capped noneconomic medical malpractice damages in 2003 and a new study finds that it has not had the intended effect.  The study conducted by Public Citizen found that healthcare costs and insurance premiums have not decreased in Texas. Additionally, the study found that there are not significantly more doctors per capita in Texas as a result of the state’s tort reform.  Physician groups dispute the findings of the study.

As Pennsylvania continues its tort reform discussions it is important to keep in mind the data available from other states, such as Texas, so that informed decisions can be made about laws that affect Pennsylvania medical malpractice victims.

Last week doctors urged Congress to reduce the federal deficit by limiting medical malpractice lawsuits.  Almost 100 medical groups, including the American Medical Association, urged the Congressional committee to help reduce the nation’s deficit.  The AMA estimates that limits on noneconomic damages in medical malpractice lawsuits could save taxpayers more than $62 billion over the next decade.

There is some criticism about the AMA’s estimate and whether it is accurate.  Additionally, there is concern about the individual medical malpractice victims and their families.  Should they suffer and be denied damages for the negligence of their doctors? Should a medical malpractice victim have to suffer the consequences of malpractice while victims of other types of malpractice do not?

Additionally, a preset legal limit on the recovery of medical malpractice damages may face a constitutional challenge.  The 7^th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and many state constitutions, provide people with the right to a jury trial for civil lawsuits.  That may mean that a jury, not Congress, gets to decide medical malpractice damages.

What do you think? Is limiting medical malpractice damages constitutional and good for the country or potentially unconstitutional and unfair to individual malpractice victims?

In Pennsylvania, you will soon be able to see the results of your own blood work without getting the information filtered through a physician.    The Obama Administration recently announced a new rule that is expected to take effect in a few months that would allow patients to get their own blood work results directly from the lab without waiting for a physician to receive and review the results.

Research indicates that some lab results never make it back to the doctor and that some doctors fail to communicate with patients about abnormal blood work results.  The Obama Administration has introduced the new rule in an effort to decrease instances of miscommunication and potential harm.

Those in support of the rule believe that patients will become empowered to take care of their own health.  Those opposed to the rule believe that doctors are needed to properly interpret test results.  What do you think? Is this a good thing for Pennsylvania patients?  Will it decrease instances of Pennsylvania medical malpractice or give patients access to hard to understand information?