A recent proposal by the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force recommends that adults should start screening for colorectal cancer routinely at age 45, instead of waiting until age 50. The task force is an independent group of experts appointed by the Department of Health and Human Services. While it still must be finalized, its guidance on screening and preventative care services reflects a rise in higher rates of colon and rectal cancer in generations born since 1950, The New York Times states. According to a study by the American Cancer Society, 12% of the 147,950 colorectal cancers that will be diagnosed this year will be found in adults under the age of 50; that is over 18,000 cases.
A group disproportionately affected is African Americans, who are 20% more likely to get colorectal cancer, and 40% more likely to die from it that most other groups. This is due to a combination of complex reasons, including risk factors, health care access, and socioeconomic status.
An article published in JAMA Network examined the incidence rates of colorectal cancer in 1 year increments, focusing on the transition between ages 49 and 50 years of age. Researchers studied 165,160 patients from a variety of demographic backgrounds and geographical regions from 2000-2005. They observed the colorectal cancer incidence rates in 1-year age increments (30-60 years) in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 18 registries (STEER 18). They found an incidence rate increase of 46.1% from 49 to 50 years of age. A total of 92.9% of the cases of colorectal cancer diagnosed at 50 years of age were invasive (beyond situ stage).
The steep incidence increases from 49 to 50 years of age are consistent with preexisting colorectal cancers diagnosed via screening uptake. These findings suggest the presence of a large undetected preclinical case burden in patients younger than 50 years old that is not observed in the STEER 18.
These results support the recommendation to begin screenings earlier. The panel also emphasized that health care providers should especially encourage black men and women to be screened at 45 due to high rates of disease and higher death rates in the African American community. Dr. Kimmi Ng, director of the Young-Onset Colorectal Cancer Center at the Dana-Farber Institute in Boston comments “Lives will be saved. We will be preventing cancers in young people, catching them at an earlier stage when they are more likely to be curable, and hopefully improving survival rates.”
While some physicians are vigilant, some younger patients feel their complaints are dismissed by doctors. The Colorectal Cancer Alliance states 81% of young adults with colorectal cancer said they experienced at least three symptoms of cancer before getting diagnosed. Additionally, more than half were misdiagnosed with hemorrhoids, anemia, IBS, or mental health problems. Abramson, Brown & Dugan is committed to advocating on behalf of people who have not received adequate preventative care, diagnosis, or treatment by health care professionals. If you or someone you know has been affected by malpractice, contact us today.
A recent study published in JAMA Pediatrics examines the association between epidural analgesia during labor and the risk of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) in offspring. Researchers looked at a multiethnic population-based clinical birth cohort of 147,895 children who were delivered vaginally between 1/1/2008 and 12/31/2015. Children were followed up to the age of 1 year or until: clinical diagnosis of ASD, last date of health plan enrollment, death, or the end of the study. Autism spectrum disorders were diagnosed in 1.9% of the children delivered using epidural analgesia versus 1.3% of the children delivered vaginally without it. After adjusting for potential cofounders, this is a 37% relative increase in risk which is significant. The results of this study suggest that maternal labor epidural analgesia (LEA) may be associated with increased risk for children developing ASD.
While further research is warranted to confirm the study findings, the potential implications are significant. Epidural analgesia is a central neve block technique achieved by injecting a local anesthetic close to the nerves that transmit pain. This is done so through a catheter in the lower back that continuously delivers medication throughout labor. Epidurals are a widely accepted practice used to ease the pain of childbirth for women. An article published in Stanford Medicine examined 17 million deliveries nationwide from 2009-2014, which found that epidurals or other spinal anesthesia were used in 71% of births, a 10% increase from 2008.
The growing numbers of epidural analgesia during birth is concerning given the findings of Chunyuan Qiu, MD, MS, Jane C. Lin, MS, and Jiaxiao M. Shi, PhD in JAMA Pediatrics. While there are many suspected links, there is no known single cause for autism spectrum disorder. If epidurals do indeed increase the risk of a child developing ASD, it would impact many women’s decision regarding pain management during childbirth. Abramson, Brown & Dugan specialize in medical malpractice law and have extensive experience in birth injury related cases. If you or someone you know has been affected by medical malpractice, contact us today.
A recent article published in Imperial College London News discusses the ongoing research and development of a blood test prototype for brain damage in newborns who experienced oxygen deprivation during birth. Imperial College London, in collaboration with groups in India, Italy, and America conducted their research in Indian hospitals and published the findings in Scientific Reports.
Oxygen deprivation can occur for a variety of reasons including a lack of oxygen in the mother’s blood, infection, umbilical cord issues, birth canal delays, placental separation, and delivery trauma. Oxygen deprivation can lead to brain damage, which develops over hours to months after birth. Depending on what part of the brain is affected, this can result in a number of different neurological including cerebral palsy, erb’s palsy, epilepsy, and others.
The researchers conducted their preliminary study using 45 babies that experienced oxygen deprivation at birth. The babies had their blood taken within six hours of birth, and then again 18 months later. It was sequenced to examine any differences in gene expression between the babies who had developed neurodisabilities and those who did not.
In total, researches found 855 genes that were expressed differently between the two groups, two of which were significantly different. Lead author Dr. Paolo Montaldo hopes that examining these two genes could help scientists better understand the causes of neurodisabilities following oxygen deprivation and subsequently, how to disrupt them. Identifying babies most at risk for developing a neurological condition would also allow for targeted early interventions for improved outcomes. The team of researchers plans to expand their blood testing study to a larger number of babies to gather more insight.
The potential benefits of early diagnosis are endless. However, even with a confirmed diagnosis and early intervention, the effects of brain damage due to oxygen deprivation can cause serious lifelong neurological, developmental, physical, behavioral, and psychological issues. The attorneys at Abramson, Brown & Dugan are committed to helping those who have been negatively impacted by physician error. All of our attorneys are experienced in the field of medical malpractice; Kevin Dugan has a particular concentration in birth injury cases, including medical errors in labor and delivery resulting in newborn brain injury and cerebral palsy. If you are seeking support or would like to discuss a potential case, contact us today.
An article written by Shiva R. Mishra, MPH, Hsin Chung, PhD, and Michael Waller, PhD published in JAMA Network discusses the association between reproductive life span and the incident of nonfatal cardiovascular disease (CVD) in women. CVD is a group of diseases involving the heart or blood vessels, which includes hypertension, coronary artery disease, heart attacks, heart failure, heart valve problems, and abnormal heart rhythms. Early menarche and early menopause are known risk factors for CVD in women. Researchers looked at 12 studies, analyzing a total of 307,855 women in the International Collaboration for a Life Course Approach to Reproductive Health and Chronic Disease Events (InterLACE) to investigate the correlation between reproductive life span in addition to the age at menarche and menopause.
From the women surveyed, the mean age at menarche was 13, the mean reproductive life span was 37.2, and the mean age at menopause was 50.2. They found that women with very short (<30) reproductive life spans were at 1.71 times higher risk of incident CVD events than women with reproductive life spans of 36-38 years. Women who had had both short reproductive life spans (<33) and early menarche (age <11 years) had the highest risk of CVD compared with the median menarche age and reproductive life span length.
A study lead by Saraschandra Vallabhojosyula published in Circulation: Heart Failure looked at sex disparities in the management and outcomes acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) in the young. A total of 90,648 AMI-CS admissions between the ages of 18 and 55, during 2000 to 2017 were reviewed; 26% of which were women. They found that in young AMI-CS admissions, women were treated less aggressively. Women received less frequent coronary angiography than men (73% versus 78.7%), less early coronary angiography (49.2% versus 54.1%) less percutaneous coronary intervention (59.2% versus 64%), and less mechanical circulatory support (50.3% versus 59.2%). Subsequently, female sex was an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (23% in women versus 21.7% in men).
The presentation of CVD looks different in men and women; despite the impact of CVD on women, awareness and education remain low. Assistant Professor of Medicine at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Lili Barouch, MD explains “Women are much more likely to have atypical heart attack symptoms. While the classical symptoms, such as chest pains, apply to both men and women, women are much more likely to get less common symptoms such as indigestion, shortness of breath, and back pain, sometimes even in the absence of obvious chest discomfort”
Hanna Gaggin, MD, MPH and Andrew Oseran, MD, MBA wrote an article for Harvard Health Publishing regarding the gender differences in cardiovascular disease. A recent study based on over two million patients found that women were less likely to be prescribed aspirin, statins, and certain blood pressure medications compared to men. These types of medications are commonly used to prevent CVD or its progression. A general lack of awareness of CVD in women may lead to doctors missing heart attacks in women or delaying their diagnosis.
Regardless of your sex, it is your doctor’s responsibility to provide adequate prevention, diagnosis, and treatment to protect your cardiovascular health. Abramson, Brown & Dugan is committed to advocating for people who have been negatively impacted by medical malpractice. If you or someone you know has been harmed due to medical error, contact us today.
A recent article published in The New York Times discusses a study in the Journal of General Internal Medicine which examines the link between time change and medical errors. The study’s lead author Dr. Bhanu Prakash Kolla is a professor of psychiatry at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN. Researchers utilized voluntarily reported, patient safety-related incidents caused by defective systems, equipment failure, or human error. They looked at data from the seven days preceding and following time changes in the spring and fall over an 8-year period. There were no significant differences in overall errors. However, when the researchers looked at the number of human errors alone, there was a statistically significant increase of 18.7%, mostly involving medication administration. This increase was only observed during the fall time change, when the clocks were moved backwards by one hour.
Time Magazine published a piece outlining the origin of daylight saving time, the principal purpose of which is to save energy. Its effectiveness in doing so is unclear; numerous studies have been conducted with conflicting findings. CNN published a story examining the effects changing the clocks has on our sleep. Dr. Kannan Ramar, a sleep specialist at the Mayo Clinic states, “We’ve had evidence slowly building up over the years, in terms of the adverse effects when we move from daylight saving time to standard time, and vice versa.” These impacts include cardiovascular issues like stroke and atrial fibrillation, medication errors, mental health struggles, and increased traffic accidents. This aligns with Dr. Kolla’s results that indicate when we lose an hour of sleep in the fall, human error, specifically involving medication administration, increases significantly.
Dr. Rafael Pelayo, a sleep specialist with the Stanford Sleep Medicine Center states “Biologically it doesn’t make any sense. Even though you’re just getting an hour less of sleep, it takes about five days to get back in sync.” The American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) agrees, calling for a permanent, countrywide transition to a single system of time. Some legislatures agree too; ‘The Sunshine Protection Act’ was introduced in 2019 and proposes observing daylight savings time permanently. So far there are currently 13 states that have enacted legislation and at least 32 states that have considered 85 pieces of legislation to provide for year-round daylight saving time. Current federal law requires an act of Congress to make the change. While the future of daylight-saving time is uncertain, the research suggests that losing an hour of sleep in the fall can significantly increase the occurrence of human error and subsequent medical malpractice.
Regardless of the underlying reason for the malpractice, physicians must be held accountable for their medical errors. The attorneys at Abramson, Brown & Dugan have vast experience handling medical malpractice cases. If you or a loved one has been harmed as a result of medical error, contact one of our experienced attorneys today.
Abramson, Brown & Dugan is proud to announce that attorney, Mark Abramson has been recognized as “Lawyer of the Year” for Plaintiffs’ Medical Malpractice in The Best Lawyers in America® 2021. Only a single lawyer in a specific practice area and location is honored with a “Lawyer of the Year” designation. Lawyers from our firm have been named “Lawyer of the Year” in this practice area every year since 2017. The firm also congratulates attorney Nick Abramson who has been recognized as “One to Watch” in this practice area. Five of the firm’s attorneys were also selected as “Best Lawyers” in their respective categories and regions.
Mark Abramson was named the “Lawyer of the Year” for Medical Malpractice – Plaintiffs in Manchester in addition to being recognized as a “Best Lawyer” for his work in the areas of Medical Malpractice Law – Plaintiffs and Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs as he has been for every year since 1995. Mark was previously named “Lawyer of the Year” in Plaintiff’s Personal Injury litigation in 2013. As a founding member of the firm, Mark has devoted the past forty years to representing victims of medical malpractice and other wrongful death/catastrophic injury cases.
Kevin Dugan was named a “Best Lawyer” in Manchester, NH for Medical Malpractice Law – Plaintiffs and Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs for the 15th consecutive year. Kevin has twice been named “Lawyer of the Year” – – In 2018 for Plaintiff’s Medical Malpractice litigation and in 2017 for Plaintiff’s Personal Injury litigation. Kevin’s practice emphasizes medical malpractice. He has extensive experience handling cases in virtually every aspect of medicine, with a particular concentration in birth injury cases, including medical errors in labor and delivery resulting in newborn brain injury and cerebral palsy.
Jared Green has earned the “Best Lawyer” distinction since 2018 for his work in Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs and Product Liability Litigation – Plaintiffs in Manchester. Jared has had a prominent role representing victims of clergy sexual abuse and victims of the Hepatitis C outbreak, as well as individuals who suffered horrific injuries in workplace accidents, accidents caused by defective equipment and machinery, motor vehicle crashes, and, of course, medical malpractice.
Holly Haines was also once again recognized as a “Best Lawyer” for her work in both Medical Malpractice Law – Plaintiffs and Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs in Manchester, NH. Holly has been recognized for this distinction since 2016. Holly has twice been named “Lawyer of the Year” – – In 2019 for Plaintiff’s Medical Malpractice litigation and in 2020 for Plaintiff’s Personal Injury litigation. Holly has represented many victims of medical malpractice in a wide array of medical errors and has developed a specialized expertise in breast cancer cases and in bringing claims against the numerous for-profit methadone clinics in our state taking advantage of victims of the opioid crisis.
Eva Bleich has earned the “Best Lawyer” distinction for Medical Malpractice Law – Plaintiffs in Manchester. Eva has been recognized for this distinction every year since 2016 and has been named “Lawyer of the Year” for Plaintiff’s Medical Malpractice litigation in 2017 and 2020. Eva’s medical background as a registered nurse guides her as she represents victims and families of victims of medical malpractice in almost all medical areas.
Nick Abramson’s practice is focused on representing plaintiffs in matters involving medical malpractice and high-damage personal injuries. Nick handles a wide array of cases including failures to diagnose, erroneous administration of medication, wrongful births, and other areas of medical negligence. Nick has earned the “One to Watch” award for Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury litigation. This recognition is given to attorneys who are earlier in their years for outstanding professional excellence in a short period of time.
Best Lawyers has been published since 1983 and is highly regarded because lawyers are included on the “Best Lawyers” list based entirely on peer-review. Best Lawyers lists are compiled based on an exhaustive peer-review evaluation. Almost 87,000 industry leading lawyers are eligible to vote (from around the world), and we have received almost 10 million evaluations on the legal abilities of other lawyers based on their specific practice areas around the world. The lists are published in inserts in prestigious publication’s such as the Wall Street Journal and Boston Globe. All of the firm’s attorneys selected as Best Lawyers have also received recognition as “NH Top Attorneys” and “Best Lawyers in New England.” Eva Bleich and Holly Haines are recognized as “Women Leaders in the Law” for their Best Lawyers selection.
Abramson, Brown & Dugan is an award-winning medical malpractice and serious injury law firm recognized by its peers for excellence in client advocacy and precedent setting legal practice. The lawyers at Abramson, Brown & Dugan have won more medical malpractice settlements and verdicts than any other law firm in New Hampshire.