• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Singapore Hospitals are like circus/hawlker center. Every visit is separate. Don't care about patient's overall health.

bic_cherry

Alfrescian
Loyal
Singapore Hospitals are like circus/hawlker center. Every visit is separate. Don't care about patient's overall health.

=====================
Apex court grants woman's appeal against Changi General Hospital over delay in lung cancer diagnosis.



Changi General Hospital’s medical centre opens with new model of patient care
An overview of the new Changi General Hospital medical centre. (Photo: Changi General Hospital)

By Lydia Lam
26 Feb 2019 12:46PM (Updated: 26 Feb 2019 12:55PM)

SINGAPORE: The Court of Appeal on Tuesday (Feb 26) granted a woman her appeal against Changi General Hospital (CGH) for delaying diagnosis of her lung cancer.

A High Court judge had dismissed the claims of negligence in February last year, finding that a nodule in one of Ms Noor Azlin Abdul Rahman's lungs had been benign when first detected in 2007.

However, the apex court on Tuesday found that CGH was in breach of its duty of care owed to the woman by failing to have in place a proper system for adequate follow-up of radiological results and patient management.

This resulted in a delay in diagnosing Ms Azlin with lung cancer, said Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon and Judges of Appeal Andrew Phang and Judith Prakash.

Ms Azlin first visited CGH in 2007, where an X-ray of her chest found opacity. She was referred to specialist respiratory physician Dr Imran Mohamed Noor, who ordered two further X-rays and assessed that the opacity "appeared to be resolving or had resolved on its own".

He gave Ms Azlin an open date for a follow-up. The woman went back to CGH twice, seeing two doctors at the Accident & Emergency (A&E) department in April 2010 and July 2011.

Both times, chest X-rays were performed on Ms Azlin, and the radiologist recommended follow-up for the opacity, but none was carried out.

A nodule was found in Ms Azlin's chest by a CGH respiratory physician only after she was referred there by Raffles Medical Clinic in late 2011 for coughing, breathlessness and blood in her phlegm.

A biopsy in February 2012 confirmed that the nodule was malignant and she had lung cancer. The cancer progressed to Stage IV in August 2014 and Ms Azlin was found to be suffering from a rare condition known as ALK gene arrangement.

By October 2016, the cancer had spread to her brain.

Ms Azlin sued CGH and three doctors in January 2015, saying that their negligence delayed the diagnosis and treatment of her lung cancer, causing it to go untreated.

Justice Belinda Ang in February last year ruled that the respondents had met the standard of care expected of them.

She said Ms Azlin did not have lung cancer, or that the nodule was benign, between October 2007 and July 2011.

Moreover, she was treated for her ALK-positive lung cancer at the earliest available time, because drugs approved for such a disease were available for clinical trials in Singapore only in 2013 and 2014 and only for patients suffering late-stage cancer.

CGH NEGLIGENT BUT DOCTORS NOT NEGLIGENT, COURT OF APPEAL FINDS

The Court of Appeal agreed with the High Court judge's decision that the two A&E doctors were not in breach of duty, as an A&E doctor "is not expected to conduct a general health screening". Instead, his priority is to resolve the patient's presenting complaints - in this case Ms Azlin's chest pains.

The apex court also agreed with the High Court judge's ruling that the first CGH doctor Ms Azlin had seen - Dr Imran - had breached his duty of care for failing to schedule a follow-up appointment, even though he was uncertain that the opacity in Ms Azlin's chest had resolved completely.

Although the judges found none of the doctors liable in negligence, they found that "CGH’s negligence caused a significant delay of at least seven months in diagnosis".

According to the appeal judges, the patient management system at CGH resulted in Ms Azlin, who had a persistent nodule in her lung, being seen by only one respiratory specialist over four years.

The system CGH had to review radiological reports was "inadequate" because it did not allow comprehensive management of patients, with "no appropriate mechanism for the consolidation of what was already known".

That is, each time Ms Azlin went to the A&E department, and each time a radiological report on her nodule was prepared, it was seemingly "treated as an isolated incident".

The A&E doctors did not have access to Dr Imran's notes, as his consultation with Ms Azlin had not been at A&E.

"CGH did not have a practice of sending its patients the report and test results from the scans conducted at the hospital," said the judges. "It was plainly unreasonable for CGH to rely on the patient's account of what happened at consultations outside of the A&E department.

"If the A&E doctor reviewing the radiological report had checked against Dr Imran’s notes, for example, it would have become immediately obvious to him that the only specialist who had seen her over the past four years had mistakenly concluded that the opacity was resolving or had resolved," said the judges.

The A&E doctor would have concluded that "the nodule had been persistent and had not been properly assessed by a specialist", they said.

The judges said an amicable settlement would allow Ms Azlin "to focus on battling her cancer and recovering as best as she can", saying it would be "appropriate for CGH to consider the possibility of a settlement in the interests of expediency and resolution".

The Court of Appeal judges have reserved costs and referred the question of loss and damages back to the High Court judge.

Source: CNA/ll(cy)

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...-lawsuit-lung-cancer-delay-diagnosis-11289948
 
Last edited:

mako65

Alfrescian
Loyal
Just dun goto da new Sengkang hospital if u hve other choices! Lotsa new n inexperienced staff..
 

borom

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
So many foreigners/new citizens jam up the whole system and as a result locals not getting the requisite medical care.
70% voted for this and KBW $8 bypass surgery.
As for Sengkang hospital, I went there once and I was asked to go to Sengkang Polyclinic to collect my medication as the Hospital does not have my medication-what if if its at nite and the Polyclinic is closed ?
Imagine a Hospital does not have medication and have to ask patients to go to another clinic-=so first world!
 

LordElrond

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
I say the judgement is a joke. Hospital guilty but not any specific individual. Is this going to be the trend in dishing out judgement
 

bic_cherry

Alfrescian
Loyal
I say the judgement is a joke. Hospital guilty but not any specific individual. Is this going to be the trend in dishing out judgement
Actually, this judgement is in sense God sent for the patient because the high court judge (Justice Belinda Ang) in fact said hospital was not negligent but the patient appealed and ends up, actually the hospital was negligent/ the patient management system was very very flawed.

This one is a civil case, so unless there is obvious malice or serious professional misconduct, court would not bother because that isn't the issue and court got no business to impose morals unless conduct is obviously egregious.

Main issue is to provide remedy to damages caused by identifiable defendant, which in this case, the judge identified as the hospital (CGH).

So CGH must now pay the victim the damages due to their medical records/ patient management system allowing the victim to fall through the cracks and consequently had her cancer diagnosis delayed for a significant period of time.
 

bic_cherry

Alfrescian
Loyal
I thought we have world class health care ...why no electronic health records?
Maybe computer hang, or slow, so cannot be used. Even Singpass like every other day is under maintenance, probably same vendor as hospital records, only available at certain hours and if not in maintenance mode.

Maybe like labyrinth, cannot find the data needed.

Maybe is paper records, so each department has it's own file. A&E has no access to other department records.

All wants fast and cheap, so different department Drs don't communicate. Maybe patient mati, also dunno is hospital fault. Last time hospital do what scan also will not explain, CT/MRI, patient also cannot get report... Nowadays, patients watch YouTube and are even smarter than the doctor themselves...

Point now is that all doctors will check this and check that, double and even triple confirm...

Hospital will install best in class software and use block chain to back up data even...

Ultimately, insurance price will increase 10x, so every body pls be prepared....

Or just keep fit and stay out of hospital to begin with.
 

LordElrond

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Yeah but judge asks hospital to “settle with patient” which is a useless judgement. Now the hospital can just offer her 50k take it or leave it. She’d probably run out of money to pursue the damages. If hospital is guilty, court should have awarded the damages, not “tick off” the hospital and leave the victim to struggle further with the hospital.
 

LordElrond

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Maybe computer hang, or slow, so cannot be used. Even Singpass like every other day is under maintenance, probably same vendor as hospital records, only available at certain hours and if not in maintenance mode.

Maybe like labyrinth, cannot find the data needed.

Maybe is paper records, so each department has it's own file. A&E has no access to other department records.

All wants fast and cheap, so different department Drs don't communicate. Maybe patient mati, also dunno is hospital fault. Last time hospital do what scan also will not explain, CT/MRI, patient also cannot get report... Nowadays, patients watch YouTube and are even smarter than the doctor themselves...

Point now is that all doctors will check this and check that, double and even triple confirm...

Hospital will install best in class software and use block chain to back up data even...

Ultimately, insurance price will increase 10x, so every body pls be prepared....

Or just keep fit and stay out of hospital to begin with.
Don’t talk cock. Insurance premium increased because MediShield Life wants a share.
 

bic_cherry

Alfrescian
Loyal
Don’t talk cock. Insurance premium increased because MediShield Life wants a share.
Actually, medishield-life is a subsidy for the rich at the expense of the poor.

But even with this subsidy, premiums still went up because the claims increased with doctors offering more complex procedures, more advanced and thus much more expensive treatments.

Some doctors also used insurance as blank cheque and one performed a surgical procedure costing $70,000 when a $5000 one would suffice.

One patient claimed for 12 nose scopes in one year. Either the patient had a fettish for nose scopes or the doctor treated the patient like an ATM machine and would offer a nose scopes whenever he wanted to withdraw$$$: https://www.todayonline.com/singapo...l-new-integrated-shield-plans-full-riders-moh

Medishield-life: Rich people ROB poor people's life savings in Singapore.

Rich Singaporeans are competing to claim 2.03786x more than middle class, yet medishield-life is supposed to be pre-funded by all, INCLUDING the poor; why do the poor subsidise the rich in the medishield-life insurance scheme?

According to MOH stats, "Nine per cent of full rider policyholders made claims in 2016, compared to 7 per cent of those without riders"
"According to MOH, the average bill claimed by a full rider policyholder cost S$9,093 in 2016, about 58.5 per cent higher than that of an average IP holder (S$5,738). Patients with riders were more likely to visit private hospitals than those without riders, contributing to a bulk of this differential. "


Calculation:
Since hospitalization claims rate for rider holder is 9% as opposed to 7% for non-rider holders and also 1.585X more for rider holders,
Increase payout value to rider holders= 9/7 X 1.585= 2.03786 times that of average IP holders.

Since private insurers selling IP plans make claims from (and basic premium payments) to MOH wrt medishield-life, it can be said that those with full riders make in excess of 2X claims from the common medishield-life insurance pool.

Pls note that the actual multiple may actually be even higher than 2.03786 times, since MOH own definition of the 'average IP' holder is likely to also include BOTH partial and full rider holders, the latter of whom make up 30% of the IP pool which in itself is constituted by the more wealthy 68% of Singaporeans.

It was also reported that poorer Singaporeans are unable to receive proper public healthcare cancer treatments because even the public transport costs to and from hospital may turn out to be a hindrance in itself.

It is also noted that the MOH is subsidising many wealthy Singaporeans indiscriminately just based on their declared household address and income levels even though by the fact that these Singaporeans can afford not just IP plans or worse, even very expensive full rider add-on plans, remains prima facie evidence that (MOH is squandering state funds to buy votes given that) by their expensive taste for expensive insurance products, these same wealthy folks are indeed very well to do.

In its inception, MOH explained the huge jump in compulsory medishield-life premiums over the old optional medishield plans by using 'prefunding' (with the option of future premium discounts and refunds) as the reason why basic medishield-life premiums for the young increased so much. Yet, short of doing IP plan insurance companies a business favour and helping them mediate amongst themselves an agreement to cease the sale of loss making full rider for medishield-life IP plans (and coincidentally reducing the population of (double value claims) full rider holders in the process), MOH is doing precious little independently to lead in reducing the raw deal that medishield-life especially gives to the poor ('prefunding') and the SQUANDERING OF STATE FUNDS, aka increase in GST. Perhaps, for a start, all basic medishield-life subsidies to anybody with an IP rider should be REMOVED with immediate effect and those with IPs, 1year later. Only those on BASIC medishield-life compulsory insurance (and no other hospitalization insurance plans) can qualify for medishield-life premium subsidies of any form.

Ultimately, no medishield-life nor associated integrated plans should be valid at any private hospital because those Singaporeans who wish to have private insurance coverage are like those who buy/ invest property in foreign jurisdictions: they still have to serve NS in Singapore. But if they have robbers inside their foreign properties, they will call the police of that foreign country in which their home is burgled; the Singapore police force cannot help them with anything that happens on foreign soil. Likewise, all medishield-life related insurance policies shall ONLY apply in PUBLIC hospitals. Those who want private healthcare, they have to buy SEPARATE insurance coverage and only AFTER they have paid up their annual basic medishield-life premiums.

In short, medishield-life and its subsidy structure is a raw deal for poorer Singaporeans and a big extravagance of government funds with the consequence that GST has to be unnecessarily raised for all. Ultimately, the poor are suffering excessively under this PAP raw deal.

The original source URL of this thread is at https://forums.fuckwarezone.com.sg/...oples-life-savings-5946620.html#post117893855
 
Top