Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Sanctions against health system demonstrate that it's time to get serious about audit trail discovery.

In the world of health care litigation it has become clear that medical malpractice cases now contain two claims-one on the medicine and one on the electronic health record (EHR). Two years of contentious discovery motions over the production of a complete copy of the EHR and audit trail in a case involving the delivery of a baby recently resulted in a nightmare scenario for a large health care system: sanctions in the form of an order entering judgment of liability in favor of the patient. The order was entered before depositions on the medicine were ever held. The decision in Prieto v. Rush University Medical Center (RUMC), et al. is the premiere example why patients' lawyers are focused on the audit trail. In this case, they were able to secure a legal victory without even litigating the underlying facts of the case.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app