Las Vegas Sun

November 16, 2009

Currently: 41° | Complete forecast | Log in

Audit recommends revival of medical screening panel

Thursday, Dec. 11, 2003 | 10:48 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- The medical-dental screening panel, which was abolished in the overhaul of Nevada's medical malpractice laws, should be revived, an audit by a national organization says.

The panel, which was composed of doctors and lawyers, reviewed malpractice claims before they went to trial to judge whether they had merit or were frivolous. Malpractice lawsuits had to be reviewed by the panel before going to trial.

A special session of the Legislature in 2002 eliminated the panel after there were complaints it took too long to review cases and was an impediment to quick settlements.

The Federation of State Medical Boards, in an audit of the Nevada State Board of Medical Examiners, says the Legislature should consider reestablishing the screening panel. But the audit said it should be "properly funded."

"Although there is a distinct difference between what constitutes a basis for a malpractice judgment and grounds for prosecutable disciplinary action, the medical-dental screening panel's findings were useful to the (examiners) board as a prescreening tool," it said.

The examiners board is responsible for disciplining errant physicians.

Sen. Ann O'Connell, R-Las Vegas, is among the appointees on a legislative subcommittee that is reviewing the audit. She said reestablishing the screening panel "is a good idea as long as we do it right." She said the previous panel had no way to enforce its findings.

Under the old system, if the screening panel found there was no malpractice, the patient could still sue.

O'Connell also said the membership on the panel was voluntary which made it difficult to fill the positions.

The federation said medical malpractice complaints submitted to the examiners board have "increased dramatically" since the screening panel was disbanded in October 2002. It suggested this can be partially attributable to a number of frivolous claims.

But the federation found there were often long delays between the filing of a case with the screening panel and its decision.

archive

  • Most Read
  • Discussed
  • Most E-mailed

Calendar »

  • 16 Mon
  • 17 Tue
  • 18 Wed
  • 19 Thu
  • 20 Fri