PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

E W Clayton

Publications and source records attributed to E W Clayton.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1992

Factors that prompted families to file medical malpractice claims following perinatal injuries.

OBJECTIVE: To identify self-reported reasons that prompt families to file malpractice claims following perinatal injuries. DESIGN: Families were interviewed by telephone using a questionnaire that contained structured and open-ended questions. PARTICIPANTS: Mothers of infants who had experienced permanent injuries or deaths and had closed malpractice claims in Florida between 1986 and August 1989 were interviewed. Questionnaires were completed by 127 (35%) of a total of 368 such families. OUTCOME MEASURES: Reasons prompting families to file and families' descriptions of medical events, advice from acquaintances, and the quality of physician-family communication. RESULTS: Families volunteered numerous reasons for filing: advised by knowledgeable acquaintances (33% of respondents), recognized cover-up (24%), needed money (24%), recognized that their child would have no future (23%), needed information (20%), and decided to seek revenge or protect others from harm (19%). Over one third of all families indicated that they were told by medical personnel prior to filing that the care provided had caused their children's injuries. Families expressed dissatisfaction with physician-patient communication. Families believed that physicians would not listen (13% of sample), would not talk openly (32%), attempted to mislead them (48%), or did not warn about long-term neurodevelopmental problems (70%). CONCLUSION: Families give many reasons for filing a claim. Obtaining money may not be the only goal for some families who file suit.

Family↗
PubMed1990

Compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.

The purpose of this article is to look at the effect of the federal compensation scheme under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act on the people and institutions involved in the administration of vaccinations. More vaccine-injured children will probably receive compensation than would have been true under state law, but each child will probably receive less money for damages. Manufacturers will pay excise taxes to fund the compensation scheme and receive, in return, substantial immunity from liability under state law. Although these provisions create incentives that work in opposite directions, producers likely will still have reason to improve the safety and efficacy of vaccines. The situation for those who administer vaccinations is less clear. Freeing them from the threat of litigation would leave them with little incentive to use immunizations appropriately because they do not contribute to the compensation scheme. Although Congress intended to make those who give vaccines immune from state claims, it may have failed to do so, leaving providers with their liability largely unchanged. The most pervasive uncertainty is that the Act is designed to self-destruct and may soon return vaccine-injured children, manufacturers, and providers to the state of the law before Congress acted.

Child↗
PubMed1990

Should promethazine in liquid form be available without prescription?

Promethazine, available by prescription only since its introduction in 1946, has been widely used for pediatric patients because of its antihistaminic, antiemetic, and sedative properties. Recently, it's makers have sought Federal Drug Administration approval to introduce two liquid over the counter allergy/cold/cough products containing promethazine as an active ingredient. Although millions of doses have been administered, promethazine use has not been free of risk. Promethazine has been reported to cause significant sedation, agitation, hallucinations, seizures, dystonic reactions, and possibly apparent life-threatening events or sudden infant death syndrome. The impact of these relatively uncommon adverse reactions on children would be minimal if parents would use over the counter promethazine only for appropriate indications and only in children greater than 2 years of age. However, according to results of research evaluating the use of various over the counter medications by families for their children, promethazine will be used inappropriately. Both its over the counter status, implying a certain margin of safety, and its formulation as a syrup, providing ease of administration, should increase its use in all age groups including that by children less than 2 years of age who may be most vulnerable to the adverse reactions associated with the drug's use.

Chemistry, Pharmaceutical↗
PubMed1987

From Rogers to Rivers: the rights of the mentally ill to refuse medication.

Many individuals with mental illness wish to avoid psychotropic drugs, a type of treatment that may relieve their symptoms only at the risk of unpleasant, even permanent, side effects. In marked contrast to the widely-held view that most patients may refuse any treatment and that even patients with mental illness may reject other psychoactive interventions such as electroconvulsive therapy and psychosurgery, the courts and legislatures have been slow to recognize any right to refuse psychotropic drugs. This Article demonstrates that many of the justifications offered for forcing patients to take unwanted medications are inadequate and that unless treatment refusals are reviewed outside mental institutions, patients' rights will rarely receive appropriate deference. The author analyzes the federal and state litigation to determine whether the courts have fashioned meaningful relief for the mentally ill. The Article concludes that two recent United States Supreme Court decisions have made it impossible for the federal courts to provide adequate protection. By contrast, several state courts have responded to the needs and rights of patients with mental illness.

Federal Government↗