All posts by Dr. Margolis

Monthly Case: Greenfield filter with clot

May Newsletter Covered

What is shown? Shown (right photo) is a piece of metal wiring with blood clot trapped in it. The device is called a Greenfield filter. It’s about two inches long altogether. The left picture shows the device where it was found – in the inferior vena cava (dashed lines). The inferior vena has been opened up along its length. The diagrammatic insert shows the filter without clot attached.

What is a Greenfield filter? A Greenfield filter is a device inserted into the inferior vena cava (the large vein returning blood to the heart). The filter traps clot that might travel up from the legs in some patients. It is inserted through the groin and threaded up the inferior vena cava to rest there.

How does the filter stay put? Little hooks at the ends of the wires keep it in place inside the vein. This keeps it from traveling up the vein closer to the heart

How does the filter help the patient? By trapping clots that travel in the blood stream up from the legs, the filter prevents them from traveling any farther. Specifically, the filter prevents them from reaching the lungs. The Greenfield filter saves lives.

Who gets a Greenfield filter? Patients with clots in their legs (deep venous thromboses – DVT’s) get a Greenfield filter.

What was the story here? This was a 32 year old man with cancer (lymphoma), DVT, and many infections. He spent the six months leading up to his death in the hospital.

Why did the family request and autopsy? The family was looking for closure and peace of mind. They were also concerned about the quality of care and the possibility of missed diagnoses. The family was dedicated and committed and had one member or another stay with him at all times. Their style was centered on control with extensive documentation and detailed note-taking of any medical information or conversations that came their way. Behind all this were deep feelings of grief over the loss of a son and brother.

How did the autopsy help? In the setting of deep grief, it was important to make use of any and all information from the autopsy to provide both a clear picture of the quality of care and the patient’s experience prior to death. The finding of a Greenfield filter with entrapped clot indicated the following:

Filter placement. The presence of the filter itself reflected appropriate clinical judgment and excellent quality care on the part of the providers. It is standard of care to place the filter, which is what this patient had. For a family with concerns about treatment, it was then helpful to objectively show that at least in one area (management of deep venous thrombosis), care had been appropriate. This then, could help the family feel a bit less angry about some of their concerns. It was not clear what, if anything, had already been discussed with the family about the filter’s placement. Its finding at autopsy presented another opportunity to review the clinical course.

Trapped clot. The presence of trapped clot indicated a disaster avoided. The amount of clot was significant. Without the filter the clot would have, without a doubt, traveled up the blood stream to the lungs and possibly caused the patient’s death, if not severe illness.

Conclusion. Therefore, for during a life cut short, when days and weeks had become precious to the patient and to the family, it was clear that the medical care had bought some time in this world for this patient. This was an important thing to share with a family dealing with loss; and a benefit of the autopsy.

[button label=”Latest News, Events and Articles” url=”/” target=”_blank” color=”#f05134″]


Child Abuse Legislation and Reporting

By Candace McPherson (3rd year law student, DePaul University College of Law) and Ben Margolis, M.D. (Director, Autopsy Center of Chicago).

As in other years, 2014 has seen the introduction of bills which protect our children from abuse and neglect. Here are a few:

SB3146 DCFS – Differential Response Programs
This bill mandates and supports ongoing use of Differential Response Programs – a multifaceted approach to child abuse investigation and intervention increasingly in use nationwide.

SB3223 DCFS – Child Abuse – Medical Reports
This bill mandates the timely inclusion of medical records during an investigation by the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS).

HB5487 DCFS – Abuse Reports – Disabled Kids
This bill provides for the involvement of trained professionals when a DCFS investigation centers on a child with a language disability.

Why are these bills important?
Child abuse is a major social issue. Last year, nearly 3 million cases of child abuse were reported in the United States. However, despite these numbers, child abuse often goes unreported. A study, which was reported in the international journal Child Abuse & Neglect in 2000, showed that 65% of social workers, 58% of physician assistants, and 53% of physicians were not reporting all cases of child abuse. Among the reasons for failing to report incidents included: lack of certainty that abused occurred, community resistance, belief that report would cause additional harm, the need to maintain good relationships with patients and clients, insufficient evidence, and confusion about what types of injuries required reporting. Although experienced in your own profession, you may have similar issues and concerns when it comes to child abuse reporting. It is important to do the right thing.

How are abuse and neglect defined with regards to children? Child abuse is the mistreatment of a child under the age of 18 by a parent, caretaker, someone living in their home or someone who works with or around children. The mistreatment must cause injury or put the child at risk of physical injury. Child abuse can be physical (such as burns or broken bones), sexual (such as fondling or incest), or mental and emotional. Neglect happens when a parent or responsible caretaker fails to provide adequate supervision, food, clothing, shelter, hygiene or other basics for a child.

What happens to abused children? The long-term effects of child abuse can be very damaging to the child being abused or neglected. Common problems for abused children as they age include emotional problems (e.g., low self-esteem and poor self-perception), behavior problems, and poor performance in school and at work. Remember, the effects of child abuse go far beyond the individual child. 95% of child abusers were themselves abused as children. Child abuse can become a vicious cycle across generations.

Who are mandated reporters of abuse and neglect?
The list of mandated reporters is lengthy (please see the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services website). It includes funeral home directors, social workers, physicians, nurses, teachers, school personnel, child care workers, educational advocates, and so on. All are required to take action when there is a concern – either one they perceive or one they learn about.

What are the violations for willful non-report? Willful non-reporting or participation in schemes to prevent revelations of abuse are covered by law as well. Penalties range from Class A misdemeanor to Class 2 Felony depending on the degree of criminal participation and number of prior violations. The penalties are reviewed here (from least severe to most severe):
• Class A misdemeanor – usually results in a fine up to $2,500 and imprisonment in jail up to 12 months, or both.
• Class 4 felony – may include between 1 to 3 years in State Penitentiary and/or a fine up to $25,000.
• Class 3 felony – may include between 2 to 5 years in State Penitentiary; and/or a fine of up to $25,000.
• Class 2 felony – may include between 3 to 7 years in State Penitentiary and/or a fine up to $25,000.

How can a professional participate? Some professionals come into contact with families and children through defined roles which focus on children: pediatricians, teachers, school nurses, and so on. Other professionals interact with adults primarily, but children may be present during these times. For example, funeral directors may see children during the pre-need interaction. Children are often present at a funeral. And so on. Keep your eyes open. See the end of the article for tips on what to look for. If you have a concern, report directly to the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) or to a law enforcement agency in the county where the child lives. A majority of reports are initiated by calls from mandated reporters. You are joining many dedicated professionals by reporting if you have a concern.

Where to report? A report of abuse or neglect made to:
DCFS Child Abuse Hotline
(800) 25-ABUSE
(1-800-252-2873)
24/7

The Hotline is located at the Department’s State Central Register in Springfield and is available to take reports of abuse or neglect 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Anyone may report suspected child abuse or neglect. The report should include the victim’s name and address, the reason that the abuse or neglect is suspected and information about the abuser.

References:
Reporting Child Abuse; Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. Available online.
Child Abuse & Neglect, The International Society for Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect, North Carolina, 2000.

—————————-
GUIDELINES FOR IDENTIFYING CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT*
*Modified from: Helpguide.org, A Trusted Non-Profit Resource, Child Abuse & Neglect. Available online


What to look for:


Physical Abuse

Weight change Child is significantly underweight or obese.
Bruising Discoloration of the skin, unusual bruises, unexplained bruises or welts, difficulty walking or sitting.
Burns Multiple burns or in various stages of healing. Look for patterns (e.g., cigarette butt, grid).
Injuries Swellings to the face and extremities, fractures in unusual places, high incidents of accidents or frequent injuries. Injuries which appear to have a pattern such as marks from a hand or belt.
Behavior Shies away from touch and avoids physical contact with others, flinches at sudden movements, apprehensive when other children cry, wears clothing to conceal injury, seems frightened by parents or caregiver and makes strong efforts to avoid a specific person, overly compliant or withdrawn, or seems afraid to go home. Excessively withdrawn, fearful, or anxious about doing something wrong and shows extremes in behavior.

Emotional Abuse The behavioral signs of emotional abuse include negative statements about self, shy, passive, compliant, child lags in physical, mental, and emotional development, highly aggressive, overly demanding, and cruel to others.

Sexual Abuse Walking or difficulty sitting, torn clothing, pain or itching in genital area, venereal disease, or pregnancy. The behavioral signs include inappropriate displays of affection, sexual acting out, sudden use of sexual terms or new names for body parts, sleep problems including insomnia, nightmares, or refusal to sleep without a light, regressive behaviors including thumb-sucking, infantile behaviors, and a sudden change in personality.

Neglect Clothes are ill-fitting, dirty, or inappropriate for the weather (wearing a long-sleeve shirt to cover up injuries on a hot day). Hygiene is consistently bad (unbathed and unwashed hair), untreated illnesses and physical injuries. The child is frequently left unsupervised or alone or is allowed to play in unsafe situations.

Recent AMA postmortem communication guidelines favor hospitals over patient rights

Justice image
Summary
In the fall of 2013, the AMA published new guidelines for communication between hospitals, coroners and families after an unanticipated or unexplained loss. These guidelines protect the interests of hospitals over the rights of families; and, in at least one state, the guidelines violate the law. Summary opinion: In need of revision.

The passages of concern are as follows:

“5. f. Upon request, the medical examiner should provide information to next of kin regarding options for obtaining an independent autopsy or a review of the medical examiner’s findings and conclusions….

6. e. Upon request, the hospital should provide information to next of kin regarding options for obtaining an independent autopsy or review of the hospital pathologist’s findings and conclusions.

7. When the medical examiner declines jurisdiction, and the hospital declines to conduct an autopsy, the hospital should provide information to next of kin regarding options for obtaining an autopsy elsewhere.”

Background
After a sudden or unexplained death, questions arise. When the state suspects a suspicious or criminal cause of death, the medical examiner will perform the autopsy. If there is no such concern, there may still be other parties interested in learning the information found through autopsy examination. These parties are typically the family and the medical provider (e.g., clinicians and hospital). At simplest, families may request an autopsy for purposes of closure — to learn why their loved on died. Hospitals and providers undertake an awesome responsibility in their care of patients. They may want to learn about undiagnosed medical conditions — undiagnosed despite the best medical care; or undiagnosed because the patient was previously well and not under care.

However, the time of loss is as complex as the system in which it occurs. Many times, the scent of litigation wafts in and out of what should ideally be tender interactions during a family’s difficult time.

Additionally, many families do not even know they have the right to request an autopsy. A larger fraction do not know they have the right to choose a service provider. The autopsy does not have to be performed at the hospital where the medical care was provided. Families who do know this sometimes opt to have their loved one’s autopsy performed at a location separate from where the care was provided. Rightly or wrongly, the decision is often guided by a “fox guarding the hen house” concern. Nonetheless, families are free to make a choice because they know they have one.

Concerns
These guidelines reflect the AMA’s understanding of the ever-present backdrop of litigation. They keep the autopsy under control of the hospital — where the patient death may have occurred. And, furthermore, the guidelines favor that the medical examiner participate with the same goal.

These guidelines keep families in the dark about service options thereby keeping the hospital “in control” of the case. They do not inform families that they may request an alternate service provider. They give the hospital “first dibs” on the autopsy. Only “upon request” will the hospital or coroner provide names of an “independent autopsy” service provider.

Furthermore, only when the hospital or medical examiner “declines” the case (e.g., neither wants the autopsy) are these institutions to recommend to the family that they may seek an independent provider or independent consultation.

While making no statement here in favor or against the practice of litigation, these guidelines are comparable to a hospital recommending their “in-house” lawyer review the family’s legal case before letting the family know they may seek their own counsel. While most families know they may find their own lawyer; most do not necessarily know they may find their own autopsy service provider. And these guidelines ensure that vulnerable families will continue to be kept in the dark.

Against the Law
Connecticut law (Sec. 19a-286) requires that hospitals inform families in writing that they may request an autopsy with a provider of their choosing.

“Any person authorized to consent to an autopsy….may make arrangements for an autopsy to be performed at any institution that routinely performs autopsies…. Information concerning the rights and responsibilities under this subsection shall be contained in the institution’s patient bill of rights….The institution shall provide such information in writing in a language understood by the person who assumes custody of the body of the deceased person prior to the signing of an autopsy consent form by the person who assumes such custody.”

The AMA, a national organization, therefore provides guidelines that would be illegal in this state. It does so by withholding rather than providing the family with information about service options at the time of death, unless certain criteria are met.

An alternative for the AMA
Lastly, if hospitals are interested in preventing litigation, the AMA should consider why families litigate. Medical mishap is but one factor. The quality of the relationships between families and providers is as important if not more so. And, for better of worse, a family’s perceptions (and misperceptions) drive their attitudes and behavior. Sometimes, it’s the difficulty and pain of a loss that turns into anger and blame. Law suits follow.

Nonetheless, there is the important option of actively rebuilding trust during these difficult times. And this comes from openness and communication.

The success of the current trend in “I’m sorry” laws supports this; as does the data for a hospital such as the University of Michigan, which routinely admits and addresses medical error. Litigation rates at the University of Michigan are well-below national average.

Recommendation
I recommend the AMA revise these guidelines with the Connecticut law in mind.

Let families know their options for autopsy service providers right at the time of the loss.

It is simply their right to know.

Maybe then the family will trust the hospital to do the case.

 

April Case: Liver metastases

Photo Cases Newsletter

Diagnosis: Liver Metastases

What is shown?
The picture shows two slices of the liver, each with a metastasis (arrows). These were the only metastases in the liver.

Where did the metastases come from?
They came from a lung cancer.

How did this patient die?
The patient died from the lung cancer (which blocked her breathing). The metastases did not cause the patient to die.

What is a metastasis?
When a tumor spreads through the blood to other areas of the body (where it takes hold and grows) this is a metastasis.

What do metastases mean for the patient in life?
Metastases mean the tumor is more advanced and often less likely to be curable. This is because surgery to remove the main tumor will still leave behind the metastasis somewhere else in the body. It also often means the amount of tumor is large. This can affect the success of other treatments (e.g., chemotherapy).

Is this always true?
No. Some tumors can still be curable even with metastases. It depends on the number of metastases, their size, where they are in the body, and if the anatomy allows for a surgical approach. Also the type of tumor matters. For example, some Hodgkin’s lymphomas, and a testicular tumor called seminoma can be curable even with metastases. Each case is different.

Is there any other reason to remove or treat a metastasis?

Yes, this can sometimes relieve symptoms (palliation).

In this case, how did the autopsy help the family?
Anxiety over possible suffering. The amount of tumor is often connected in the family’s mind to the amount of suffering. It is important for this reason to give an exact description of the amount of tumor, where it is located, and how it affected that organ. In this case, the majority of the liver was preserved, and the patient would not have had clinical liver problems. The metastases likely caused this patient no problems.

Guilt/anger over treatment issues: Families often need to know if the autopsy findings indicated that some treatment may have saved the patient “if only” it had been tried. They may feel guilty for not having “tried harder,” or angry with the medical system for the same reason. Here, the patient’s lung tumor overwhelmed her breathing and this was the cause of death. No treatment approach dealing with the liver metastases would have helped – they were not the cause of death. This relieved the family from their worry about the liver metastases.

Summary. The finding of metastases allowed for a discussion of the progress of the disease, but did not at all suggest suffering or a missed opportunity for treatment. This allowed the family to proceed with a sense of calm, peace, and understanding.

Urban Prep students visit with the Autopsy Center

photo 3Urban Prep students visited with the Autopsy Center on March 26 to learn about the field of autopsy pathology. As part of Urban Prep’s “Discover Our City Day,” over 600 of the Bronzeville students fanned out in chaperoned groups throughout the Chicago area to meet with varied professionals, including Dr. Margolis.

They learned about the autopsy procedure but also spoke of their own experiences with loss. Most had had experience losing a loved one, but had also seen death “in the street.” While professional aspirations ranged from engineering to sports-casting, all were curious about how an autopsy works.

A student joined Dr. Margolis in donning protective equipment: from shoe covers to plastic gown. A second student volunteered as our cadaver, coming “alive” again to point out an old scar on his forehead. As the “examination” proceeded, Dr. Margolis clicked through portions of his slide show, Science to Humanity: The Autopsy, to illustrate what the body would actually show during each part of the procedure. Pneumonias, heart disease, damage lungs from smoking appeared on the screen as the dissection progressed.

By the end of the presentation, the students began to share stories and ask questions about disease and illness they or their loved ones had experience. “My mother had pneumonia,” one student shared, after seeing a microscopic slide. He commented on her shortness of breath and long hospitalization. Another, heading towards a career in psychology, commented on the “closure” an autopsy can give.


High schools interested in organizing a presentation with the Autopsy Center should contact the Autopsy Center.

Airway Mucus Plugging – Sound Cloud

Diagnosis: Airway mucus plugging

Photo Case 1 Feb 2014

What is shown?
The photograph shows the large airway opened from behind. Seen are: the voice box (left, black arrow), trachea (center); two mainstem bronchi (right, white arrows). The airway is completely filled with mucus.

How did this happen?
This patient was very weak (from cancer and from an infection), had advanced Alzheimer’s disease, and could not “clear” the mucus. Normally, people can “clear” mucus by coughing it out of the airway (and then swallowing or spitting it out). The patient was too weak to do this. So the mucus built up and blocked the airway.

How did this patient die?
The mucus blocked the airway and gradually choked the patient, preventing airflow into the lungs.

How did the autopsy help the family?
The autopsy findings allowed the family to address specific, emotionally-charged and distressing medical-related issues:

The patient’s level of comfort. The family noticed gurgling sounds during breathing and was concerned this meant the loved one was uncomfortable or suffered near the time of death. The autopsy confirmed the presence of mucus but cannot specifically comment on suffering. However, an understanding of the specific effect of mucus on air flow helped the family feel more comfortable that the patient may not have suffered.

Here’s how that worked. Because mucus builds up gradually, the patient must have had a gradual decrease in air flow (rather than abrupt, as in sudden choking). This suggests the likelihood of a gradual and long term decrease in body oxygen. This means the brain likely also had a gradual decrease in oxygen supply. Low oxygen levels cause the brain to lose or decrease consciousness. An unconscious person cannot experience suffering. This means there was a high likelihood the patient did not suffer.

The patient’s level of care. The family worried that, with all that mucus, the patient should have been suctioned by nursing staff. The autopsy cannot comment on treatment options. However, by discussing the issues and findings, the family can consider alternate points of view. For this patient, the following questions had to be considered: Given her terminal condition, what were the treatment goals? Was full care the treatment plan? Or was hospice in place? What palliative measures (e.g. suctioning) were agreed upon? Was the treatment plan made clear to the family or, more importantly, made by the family?

A family that agrees to hospice but requests suctioning suggests an active and human struggle in accepting imminent death and letting go of the loved one. A family that requests full care (including suctioning) and does not see it suggests a different set of issues.

Summary.
In this particular case, the autopsy allowed the family to come to terms with the terminal nature of the cancer; understand that their observation (of breathing) reflected the process of dying; focus their energy on bereavement rather than anger (over perceived nursing issues); and thereby achieve a sense of peace.

HB4202 (Embalming Absent Instructions)

HB4202 – Embalming Absent Instructions
Date filed: 1/13/2013

I. Introduction
Bill HB4202 (Embalming Absent Instructions) is structured to address family indecision or unresponsiveness in communicating their embalming and/or refrigeration wishes to the funeral director. While the bill functions to ensure timely disposition of the deceased, the bill takes insufficient steps to support the broad rights of families to control disposition and does not acknowledge or compassionately manage bereavement issues impacting these families.

II. Insufficient informed consent
The bill misses an opportunity to engage the family at the outset; and presumes there is no recourse with an “unresponsive” family but to act without them. Specifically, the bill provides (Part b) that the “[funeral director] licensee shall clearly disclose on the written statement … that it is required to embalm or refrigerate … after 48 hours.”

The family, however, is always present when the body arrives at the funeral home. There is a window to address needs then. The bill’s language would make sense for unidentified indigent cases (where the funeral director must act without any possibility of family input). But that is not the case here.

The language of the bill is comparable to a surgeon showing the patient a notice that the surgeon is required to “amputate or perform a skin graft…after 48 hours” if the patient does not say what he wants by then. While there is an obligation for the patient to participate, no individual should lose such control in this manner.

Additionally, informed consent is a process, not a notice. Decisions without patient input are made during emergencies, when the patient is unconscious, or when the Next of Kin is not available. They are not made when there is any degree of planning available.

III. Bereavement concern
In addition to being distraught and distracted immediately after a loss, families struggle profoundly during their time of grief. Indecision is often related to these deep internal struggles and the need to communicate with family members. While that is not an excuse for unresponsiveness, the bill does not go far enough to make clear to the family their need to come to a decision. The bill ignores the emotional basis for family’s behavior and excludes the family from the decision making process by utilizing a simple “notice.”

IV. Litigation concern
A family who can barely concentrate during an initial meeting with a funeral director and who comes back 48 hours later to find their loved one embalmed against their (intended) wishes will be an angry family. And, for better or worse, angry families litigate. While the funeral home’s defense will be that “they showed the family the notice,” the family will claim the opposite. This is a set up for a destructive process, a broken relationship with the funeral home and a poor family experience. A simple “notice” cannot function to comprise adequate communication in the setting of bereavement.

V. Autopsy concern
Autopsies are best performed prior to embalming. A family sorting through a decision whether or not to request an autopsy request may be unable to have their bereavement needs met if the body is embalmed without their consent.

VI. Recommendation
To protect the funeral home, maintain public health standards, ensure the rights of families, support the family’s bereavement, and best allow for autopsy needs, I recommend the following (or similar language):

1. Substitute the language “disclose on the written statement … etc.” with a requirement that the funeral director must provide the family with a “Short Family Form” (see 4., below)
2. Require the family to complete and sign the Short Family Form.
3. Require the funeral director to complete a “Refuse to Sign” form if the family refuses to sign the Short Family Form (This is comparable to HIPAA law requiring the physician to specify the patient refused to sign that they received a “Notice of Privacy Practices.”)
4. Include the following, on the Short Family Form:
“I represent that I, ______________________________, am legal next of kin or power of attorney for health care of the deceased __________________________ (name of deceased).
I understand that, by law, I must inform the funeral director of my decision to embalm or refrigerate the body within 48 hours of the body’s arrival to the funeral home.
In the event that I do not communicate my wishes to the funeral director within 48 hours, I authorize the funeral home to (check one only):
____ Embalm the body
____Refrigerate the body but not embalm the body
____Either embalm the body or refrigerate the body
____I am unable to specify my wish at present. I understand the funeral director will still be required to either embalm the body and/or refrigerate the body at his or her discretion.
I understand that the funeral director will follow these instructions only after 48 hours have passed from the time the body arrived at the funeral home and not before.

I understand that I am responsible for payment of service for either embalming or refrigeration which occurs as a consequence of specifications within this Short Family Form.
(Signature line)
(Date/Time line)”

VII. Final comment.
In summary, I recommend you either table this bill or tackle it “head on” by amending it to meet full standards of informed consent and accountability that I know you champion here in Illinois. Alternatively, or in addition, you may wish to consider the issue of why many funeral homes do not have refrigeration.

Thank you for your hard work on behalf our citizens.

Letter to Illinois Senate (Nursing Home – Violation – Review)

House Bill 5849

Financial Institutions

Chairperson:  Jacqueline Y. Collins

December 28, 2012

 

I.   Introduction:

House Bill 5849 creates a review team to ensure that nursing home type “AA” and “A” violations meet uniform standards prior to the issuing of such violations to a nursing home (licensee).  However, apart from the above intent, there is a discrepancy between the language and structure of the bill and the language and structure of the Nursing Home Care Act itself.

 

II.  Background:  Nursing Home Care Act

The Nursing Home Care Act is an expansive law providing for, among many things, oversight of nursing homes.  As such, and in order to ensure effective oversight, this law provides great detail.  Specifically, the law provides clarity on the time course of the violation review process and assigns authority for all participants.

 

A.  Re:  Time course of the review process

The relevant areas here are as follows (Sec. 3-301 and Sec. 3-212 (c)):

A – The [nursing home inspection team] provides a copy of their report to the facility prior to leaving the facility.

B – The facility has 10 days to provide the state with a response to the report.

C – The Director has 90 days to determine if there is a violation.

D – If a violation is found, the Director has 10 days to notify the facility.

 

In summary, the overall process allows for 100 days between a site visit and the issuing of a violation (90 days for review and determination plus 10 days to issue the violation).

Comment:  The specified time course provides more than an effective framework.  It supports a fundamental principle of our democratic society:  equality under the law.  Each participant here is important:  the nursing home, the nursing home inspection team, the Director, and, above all, the patient at the facility.  Each participant is given due consideration in that each is clearly designated a specific time to prepare their part.  The process is clear.

In addition, the timeliness ensures action thereby protecting patients who may remain at risk in their present environment.

 

B.  Re:   Specified Authority

Each participant in the Nursing Home Care Act is designated a specific authority:  the nursing home inspection team, the nursing home, the Director, and so on.

 

III. House Bill 5849:  Time course

          House Bill 5849 places the work of the newly created review team during part C above – the 90 day review period.  However, departing from the clarity of the Act, House Bill 5849 does not provide for a time course for the work of the review team.  In this regard, the bill adds a “vagueness” to the process.  The result is that the bill ceases to protect all participants in the process and undermines the role of the state.

Further, the bill requires the review team to analyze “all available data” in relation to a violation.  Such an undertaking could be potentially expansive.  In the extreme, a review team may use up the 90 day period by researching state data.  This may impinge on the important need of the state to determine and report a violation.  While the bill may make the process more equitable on one level, the timeliness is there to protect patients who may, in fact, be in a dangerous situation.  It may place patients at risk.

 

IV. House Bill 5849:  Assigned Authority

          House Bill 5849 does not specify the review team’s authority.  As the review team’s role is positioned between the nursing home inspection and the Director’s review of any report, it would seem that the intent is to have the review team either allow or prevent reports from coming to the attention of the Director of Public Health.  However, the exact role is not made clear and other possibilities exist (see below).

 

V.  Summary

The bill addresses the important issue of standardization of violation review.  Such a goal is commendable so that Nursing Homes may be treated equitably throughout the state.

However, especially with type “AA” and “A” violations, in which death of a patient is the concern, any change in the process must also continue to ensure that serious violations are reported in a timely and effective way.  In its current form, the bill does not meet the standard of the original law in terms of providing a time course (and therefore effective structure); or in specifying the authority of the review team.  It therefore undermines the democratic standard of “equal voice”; and may put patients at risk.

 

VI.  Recommendations

1.  Designate a specific amount of time the review team may have to review and analyze “state data and precedents” and complete their report, for example 60 days or some other reasonable length.

2.  Delete the word “all” from the phrase “all available data and precedents” or provide for language that creates similar effect.

3.  Specify that the review team’s determination will not add to the 90 days already allotted to the Director to complete the process.

4.  Specify the authority of the review team.  There seem to be three options here:

-A review team authorized to prevent a report from being reviewed by the Director.

-A review team authorized to amend a report or offer a preliminary opinion prior to forwarding to the Director, but without authority to prevent a review and determination by the Director.

-A review team functioning more as an educational, training, or quality assurance task force, but with no authority.  While this would serve an important function, in this case, it would be more appropriate for the review team’s work to be positioned after the Director completes his or her determination so as not to interfere with timeliness of reporting.

 

VII.  Final comment

            As legislators, you are, of course, in a position of power over the lives of Illinois citizens.  Please remember that type “AA” violations cause the death of a patient – elderly, disabled or mentally ill – under the care and responsibility of a nursing home.  Current law allows 100 days – or about 3 months – to serve notice of violation, if need be.

You must decide how long you are willing to have these patients wait while the review team engages in its research.  Four months?  Five months?  A year?  And remember that, during this time, other patients are living under the same conditions.

To protect these patients and ensure the confidence of Illinois citizens – whose loved ones reside in these homes  I recommend amending the bill so that it:

-includes a clear and definite time course for notification of violations in the context of the review team

            -balances the review process among all participants

In so doing you will allow the bill to sit as an outstanding addition to the major legislative success of the Nursing Home Care Act.

Thank you.