MHM522 Module 3 SLP
Trident University
Erica L. Montgomery
Module 3 SLP Incident Reporting Requirements
MHM/522 Legal Aspects of Health Administration
Dr. Paulchris Okpala
May 18, 2015
Investigation of the incidents at the hospital level The incident reporting requires the application of either the voluntary or the mandatory systems. Both in Minnesota and in Utah, the reporting function lies in the hands of the professional boards. In both cases, there is a vast number of incidents that are reportable. The two cases use a medical examiner as one of the primary investigators. Additionally, there is the application of the cause analysis. In the end, the system of reporting of choice depends on their pros and cons. In Minnesota, the mandate of reporting the adverse incidents that happen within the institutions lies in the hands of the various professional boards. These boards include those that regulate such professions as podiatrists, nurses, physicians, pharmacists and physician assistants. All incidents that require mandatory reporting are presented to the Minnesota Department of Health. In the case of Utah, the institution must provide an institutional lead for the purpose of reporting, to the department of the administrative services of Utah (Marchev et al., 2003). Incidents that must be reported and explain those differences or similarities. Most of the adverse events that are listed in both Minnesota and Utah are identical. In Utah, it is required that the incidents are clearly described. The list of incidents includes a vast number of errors in medication, surgery, death, injury and suicides, amongst others. The system also requires a mandatory reporting of the suspected adverse incidents on individuals who have been transferred from other health institutions. On the hand, the Minnesota Department of health recognizes 28 incidents that are identical to those recognized in Utah. Unlike Utah, Minnesota requires a mandatory reporting of the
Erica L. Montgomery
Module 3 SLP Incident Reporting Requirements
MHM/522 Legal Aspects of Health Administration
Dr. Paulchris Okpala
May 18, 2015
Investigation of the incidents at the hospital level The incident reporting requires the application of either the voluntary or the mandatory systems. Both in Minnesota and in Utah, the reporting function lies in the hands of the professional boards. In both cases, there is a vast number of incidents that are reportable. The two cases use a medical examiner as one of the primary investigators. Additionally, there is the application of the cause analysis. In the end, the system of reporting of choice depends on their pros and cons. In Minnesota, the mandate of reporting the adverse incidents that happen within the institutions lies in the hands of the various professional boards. These boards include those that regulate such professions as podiatrists, nurses, physicians, pharmacists and physician assistants. All incidents that require mandatory reporting are presented to the Minnesota Department of Health. In the case of Utah, the institution must provide an institutional lead for the purpose of reporting, to the department of the administrative services of Utah (Marchev et al., 2003). Incidents that must be reported and explain those differences or similarities. Most of the adverse events that are listed in both Minnesota and Utah are identical. In Utah, it is required that the incidents are clearly described. The list of incidents includes a vast number of errors in medication, surgery, death, injury and suicides, amongst others. The system also requires a mandatory reporting of the suspected adverse incidents on individuals who have been transferred from other health institutions. On the hand, the Minnesota Department of health recognizes 28 incidents that are identical to those recognized in Utah. Unlike Utah, Minnesota requires a mandatory reporting of the
References: Hall, K. L., Wiecek, W. M., & Finkelman, P. (1991). American legal history: Cases and materials. New York: Oxford University Press. Marchev, M., Rosenthal, J., Booth, M., National Academy for State Health Policy (U.S.), & Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. (2003). How states report medical errors to the public: Issues and barriers. Portland, ME: National Academy for State Health Policy. Minnesota Institute of Legal Education. (2000). Medical records. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota Institute of Legal Education. Minnesota Institute of Legal Education. (1992). Medical malpractice claims - 1992. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota Institute of Legal Education.