Radiologist dodges malpractice death suit after mistaking diagnostic mammogram for routine screening
A New York radiologist has escaped a malpractice lawsuit after reportedly mistaking a diagnostic mammogram for a routine breast cancer screening.
An Empire State appeals court reached the 3-1 decision Wednesday, reversing a lower court’s denial of his request for summary judgment to avoid a full jury trial. Appeals judges believed Hudson Valley Radiology Associates physician Kenneth Blumberg’s duty of care did not extend beyond simply interpreting and reporting on the mammography images sent to him, Law360 reported.
“Blumberg in this case was one of many radiologists who worked at Hudson Valley. He never met or examined the [patient], and was simply asked, on a single occasion, to interpret the images of what he understood to be a routine mammogram," the June 23 ruling stated.
The case dates to April 20, 2010, when internist Henry Okere, MD, referred Lynell Green for a mammogram. The order did not specify whether the exam was for screening or diagnostic purposes, nor did it indicate if the patient had any complaints about her health.
She underwent the breast exam at Mid Rockland Imaging and allegedly told the technologist she felt a lump on her breast. But the employee told Green she had been slated for a “routine” exam, according to court documents. The imaging order also noted that she had been experiencing pain in the left breast but made no mention of the corresponding lump.
Blumberg received and read the exam at a different care site, and he later explained during deposition that he understood the order to be routine in nature. He reported no suspicious mammographic findings and recommended a follow-up exam in one year. Blumberg also never actually spoke with Green nor referrer Okere. In May 2011, she was diagnosed with cancer in her left breast and filed suit prior to her death in 2014, with her estate carrying on with the case after her passing.
Appellate judges argued pleasantries at the end of the rad’s report—“Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the care of this patient”—did not denote any further obligations.
“Absent any record evidence that Dr. Blumberg actively participated in the decedent's care … politeness alone will not give rise to a heightened duty of care," the ruling stated.
You can read more on the case from Law360 below (subscription required).
Marty Stempniak has covered healthcare since 2012, with his byline appearing in the American Hospital Association's member magazine, Modern Healthcare and McKnight's. Prior to that, he wrote about village government and local business for his hometown newspaper in Oak Park, Illinois. He won a Peter Lisagor and Gold EXCEL awards in 2017 for his coverage of the opioid epidemic.