>> Cathy: SINCE THE LEGISLATURE ADJOURNED IN MAY, WE'VE BEEN EXPLORING SEVERAL OF MINNESOTA'S NEW LAWS.

WE CONTINUE THAT TONIGHT WITH A LOOK AT ONE THAT HASN'T GARNERED A LOT OF ATTENTION.

IT'S CALLED THE COMMUNICATION AND RESOLUTION AFTER A HEALTH CARE ADVERSE INCIDENT ACT, AND IT'S DESIGNED TO FOSTER FRANK CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN PATIENTS AND FAMILIES AND HEALTHCARE FACILITIES AND PROVIDERS WITHOUT FEAR OF LEGAL RETALIATION.

HERE WITH MORE, DR. WILLIAM NICHOLSON, PRESIDENT OF THE MINNESOTA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION.

DOCTOR, I THINK WE SHOULD PROBABLY GET SOME TERMINOLOGY DOWN FOR OUR VIEWERS.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO HAVE AN ADVERSE OUTCOME WITH A PATIENT?

>> SURE, IT CAN MEAN A WIDE VARIETY OF THINGS.

AN ADVERSE MEDICAL EVENT IS SORT OF THE PARLANCE IN THE MEDICAL WORLD.

IT MEANS THAT SOMETHING DIDN'T GO RIGHT DURING YOUR MEDICAL CARE.

THESE ARE VERY RARE THINGS, BUT THEY DO HAPPEN, AND SO THE MINNESOTA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AS PART OF OUR GOAL TO MAKE SURE THAT MINNESOTA IS THE HEALTHIEST STATE IN AMERICA, ARE TAKING N THIS ISSUE AND TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE IMPROVE OUR APPROACH TO ADVERSE MEDICAL EVENTS.

>> Cathy: WHAT WAS THE PREVIOUS PROTOCOL BEFORE THIS LAW?

IF SOMEONE WERE TO HAVE AN ADVERSE SITUATION?

>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW, THERE ARE LOTS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES WHEN THERE'S AN ADVERSE MEDICAL EVENT AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS A SYSTEM AND A PROCESS THAT CAN SUPPORT THE BEST PRACTICE FOR EVERY PATIENT ACROSS THE STATE, AND THAT'S WHY WE WENT TO THE STATE CAPITOL.

WE HAVE GREAT EVIDENCE FROM OTHER STATES AND OTHER INSTITUTIONS THAT HAVE IMPLEMENTED THIS PROCESS, AND WE KNOW THAT IT WORKS AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT PATIENTS IN MINNESOTA BENEFIT FROM IT, ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE IN A DIFFICULT POSITION LIKE THIS.

>> Eric: HOW IS COMMUNICATION NOW HINDERED BETWEEN A FAMILY, A PATIENT, AND THE HOSPITAL OR A DOCTOR?

>> WELL, I THINK -- >> Eric: IN THE CASE OF AN ADVERSE SITUATION.

>> YEAH, I THINK THE NUMBER ONE THING IS WHAT'S THE FOCUS THE COMMUNICATION.

SO FROM THE STANDPOINT OF PHYSICIANS WHAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IS THAT WHEN SOMETHING HAPPENS TO A PATIENT THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE, THAT THE PROCESS THAT FOLLOWS IS TRANSPARENT AND PATIENT-CENTERED AND THAT WE DO ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING WE CAN TO PREVENT ANYTHING LIKE THAT FROM EVER HAPPENING AGAIN, AND TO MEET THE NEEDS OF HE ATIENT AS FAST AND AS FFECTIVELY AS POSSIBLE.

WHEN SOMETHING LIKE THAT HAPPENS THERE ARE LOTS OF APPROACHES.

WE HAVE REGULATORY SYSTEMS, WE HAVE A LEGAL SYSTEM.

WHAT PHYSICIANS WANT TO DO IS MAKE SURE WE'RE FOCUSED ON THE PATIENT.

THE PATIENT'S NEEDS AND THE HEALTH SYSTEM WHICH WE WANT TO CONTINUALLY LEARN AND IMPROVE.

>> Cathy: UNDER THE BILL, AND I READ THROUGH THE BILL, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN OPEN DISCUSSION.

IF THE FACILITY DECIDES TO ENTER INTO AN OPEN DISCUSSION, DOES THAT PRECLUDE LEGAL ACTION?

>> ANOTHER GOOD QUESTION.

SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS AN ADDITIONAL TOOL, IT DOESN'T TAKE AWAY ANY OF THE OTHER REGULATORY OR LEGAL PROCESSES THAT ARE USED TO MANAGE THESE SCENARIOS.

IT'S NOT JUST THE FACILITY THAT HAS THE CHOICE, IT'S THE PATIENT AS WELL.

AT ANY POINT THE PATIENT CAN SAY, YOU KNOW, THIS ISN'T FOR ME, THIS ISN'T WORKING, I WANT TO TRY SOMETHING ELSE.

BUT WE DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

WE THINK THAT THIS IS A BENEFICIAL PROCESS AND AS WE SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT IT, AS WE DO IT MORE, I THINK THE STATE IS GOING TO GREATLY BENEFIT FROM THIS NEW PROCESS.

>> Eric: IF THIS REDUCES MALPRACTICE CASES AGAINST A DOCTOR OR A HOSPITAL AND SO FORTH, WHAT'S IN IT FOR THE PATIENT OR THE PATIENT'S FAMILY?

>> YEAH, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

AND SO THE REASON WE WENT INTO THIS IS BECAUSE WE HAVE EVIDENCE FROM OTHER STATES, SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE THAT SAYS THAT THIS MAKES SAFER CARE AND IT GETS BETTER OUTCOMES FOR EVERYONE WHO'S INVOLVED IN AN ADVERSE MEDICAL EVENT, AND THAT'S TO EVERYONE'S BENEFIT.

WE ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T DO THIS UNILATERALLY, THIS WAS AN EFFORT WHERE WE COLLABORATED WITH THE LAWYERS WHO REPRESENT PATIENTS WHO'VE HAD ADVERSE MEDICAL EVENTS SO THAT WE WERE SURE THAT WE WERE ALIGNED AND THAT THERE'S NOTHING HAPPENING THAT WOULD IMPAIR A PATIENT'S ABILITY TO ADVOCATE FOR THEMSELVES LEGALLY OR ANY OF THAT, ANY OF THOSE THINGS BECAUSE CERTAINLY PHYSICIANS HAVE NO INTEREST IN GETTING IN THE WAY OF THAT.

WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS DELIVER GREAT HEALTH CARE AND THROUGH DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES LIKE THESE BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN A PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP, BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN INTEGRITY, HONESTY AND OPENNESS.

>> Cathy: AND HAVE THE SITUATION NOT HAPPEN AGAIN.

RIGHT.

>> OF COURSE, THAT'S THE -- >> Cathy: THAT'S THE LEARNING OUT OF ALL OF THIS I WOULD THINK.

>> ABSOLUTELY, THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING.

WE WANT TO BE A ZERO HARM STATE.

WE DON'T WANT ANYTHING BAD TO HAPPEN TO ANYBODY WHEN THEY COME INTO OUR HOSPITALS OR OUR HEALTH CARE FACILITIES AND WE HAVE TO CONSTANTLY BE VIGILANT.

WE NEED ACCESS TO THAT INFORMATION AND WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE OPEN DISCUSSIONS WITH OUR PATIENTS.

>> Cathy: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU AND IT WOULD BE THIS.

SO IF SOMETHING ERE TO HAPPEN, SAY IN SURGERY, WOULD THE HOSPITAL BE HONEST ABOUT IT AND COME FORWARD AND TELL THE PATIENT IF THE PATIENT'S STILL AROUND OR THE FAMILY, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED?

YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE MECHANISM TO START THE OPEN DISCUSSION?

>> SO CAN'T SPEAK FOR EVERY HOSPITAL BUT WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR MEDICAL ETHICS AND THE PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS THAT DRIVE ALL OF OUR MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS, YOU KNOW, OUR GOAL IS ALWAYS TO BE TRANSPARENT AND OPEN.

TO LEARN FROM OUR MISTAKES AND TO DISCLOSE ANY ERROR IMMEDIATELY AND DO WHATEVER WE CAN TO FIX THE PROBLEM.

>> Cathy: ALL RIGHT, WE'VE RUN OUT OF TIME.

DOCTOR, THANK YO