Antibiotics Side Effects Lawsuit
Antibiotics Side Effects Lawsuit
On October 3, 2013, the JAMA Internal Medicine published findings of a research highlighting alarming misuse of antibiotics for common problems, such as sore throat and bronchitis. Based on representative data on physician and emergency care collected nationwide between 1996 and 2010, the study expressed concerns at the rate at which antibiotics are prescribed. According to the study, antibiotics prescription rate is 60 percent for adults suffering from sore throat and it is 73 percent for those with bronchitis.
The report claims that antibiotics are not suitable to treat throat problem, as virus is not the cause in most of the cases. Strep throat, which is visible just in one out of 10 people complaining of sore throat, only merits treatment by antibiotic administration. Respiratory infection bronchitis, although caused by a virus, overturns within a week even if no antibiotic is administered. Also azithromycin, the most commonly prescribed antibiotics to bronchitis patients, does not subdue these viruses.
On the other hand, unnecessary prescription of antibiotics to sore throat and bronchitis patients may actually cause harm, the study asserts. It points toward the rising instances of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, viruses, and germs that require more powerful antibiotics to fight with. There is even news of the emergence of superbugs created following gene transfer of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and these remain unaffected by any medication. Above all, unnecessary antibiotic prescription adds to the financial woes of patients.
CDC Report on Antibiotic Misuse
Physicians overprescribe antibiotics to such an extent that almost four out of every five Americans are given more than enough antibiotics they need every year, according to the latest study of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Published on April 10, 2013, in the New England Journal of Medicine, the research report based on 2010 national prescription drug database warns of misuse of antibiotics at a much higher rate.
- Parent Category: Lawsuit News Alerts
- Category: Defective Product Lawsuit News And Recall Lawyer
Hip Replacement Lawsuit Settlement Information
Over 20,000 hip implant lawsuits are pending for trial in the U.S. federal court system. Johnson & Johnson faces about 12,000 DePuy hip implant lawsuits while other manufacturers, such as Stryker, Biomet, Wright Medical, Zimmer, and Smith, also face thousands of litigations claiming early failure and dislocation of devices. Many users claim to have suffered from bone lysis, nerve palsy, metal toxicity, chronic pain, and other serious complications. DePuy ASR hip lawsuits lead the list, with 7,860 litigations pending in the court. The number of DePuy Pinnacle hip lawsuits exceeds 4,200 while about 600 Biomet metal hip lawsuits are centralized in the court of District Judge Robert Miller, Jr., of Indiana. At least 50 Wright Conserve hip lawsuits are filed in the U.S. federal courts.
Johnson & Johnson Mulls Over $3 Billion Hip Implant Lawsuit Settlement
Media and legal circles are abuzz with reports indicating that Johnson & Johnson is actively considering paying out about $3 billion for a broad settlement of DePuy hip implant lawsuits. According to insider reports, the drug and medical device manufacturer plans to resolve around 11,500 hip implant lawsuits with an offer of more than $300,000 payment per litigant. The actual amount, if agreed by all plaintiffs, may go beyond $3 billion although the actual settlement terms are expected to vary depending on the outcome of seven DePuy hip implant lawsuits slated for trial starting from September 2013.
Swiss medical device manufacturer Sulzer’s $1 billion payment in 2001 stands as the biggest ever mass settlement of hip implant lawsuits offered to date. Given the complexity of injuries linked to DePuy hip implants, the mass tort settlement is likely to cost Johnson & Johnson a significantly higher amount of money. Plaintiffs have already rejected $200,000 per lawsuit settlement offered by the company in January 2013.
DePuy Hip Implant Lawsuit Trial Update
The first DePuy hip implant lawsuit ended in $8.3 million compensation award for the plaintiff. In March 2013, a California court ordered the manufacturer to compensate a former Montana prison guard for sufferings and losses caused by its defective hip implant. However, the jury rejected punitive damage claims on the ground that risks linked to the devices were made public. According to Johnson & Johnson internal sources, the manufacturer doled out $993 million to finance efforts to publicize and inform users and doctors about possible DePuy hip implant problems.
The second DePuy hip implant lawsuit filed by an Illinois nurse in a Chicago court ended in a victory for Johnson & Johnson. The pharma major is set to face another series of trials beginning September 9, 2013. Ohio federal Judge David Katz will take up the first lawsuit filed by 58-year-old Ann McCracken of New York. Next, similar hip implant lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson will be tried in succession in New Jersey, Florida, Illinois, and Los Angeles every month through January 2014.
Biomet Hip Implant Lawsuit Judge Rejects Appeal by Manufacturer
On August 28, 2013, Judge Robert Miller of Indiana Northern District dismissed a motion moved by Biomet seeking dismissal of a hip implant lawsuit. The court denied the application of federal preemption principle and ordered the trial of the litigation to proceed. Leslie Caccia, the plaintiff, required multiple surgeries to cure bone and tissue complications arising from use of Biomet M2A-Magnum metal hip.
Judge Miller has been chosen by the federal MDL panel for centralization of about 600 Biomet hip implant lawsuits.
Stryker Rejuvenate Hip Implant Lawsuit Mediation Ordered
On August 13, 2013, a New Jersey Superior Court ordered for a possible search for mediation for 10 Stryker Rejuvenate hip lawsuits selected for the first series of trials. The mediation process will look into the potential settlement options before the trial starts. More than 300 such hip implant lawsuits are pending trial in the state seeking damages for early failure of the device and pain caused by revision surgery.
The state Supreme Court has centralized all Stryker hip lawsuits at the Bergen County Superior Court for pretrial consolidation. The first of bellwether trials is expected to begin after mediation deadline ends on December 15. Stryker has reportedly estimates in place indicating that settlements and awards in Rejuvenate hip lawsuits may cost it about $400 million. It recalled its Rejuvenate and ABG II implants in July 2012 citing higher risk of revision surgery.
Hip Replacement Implant Recall Lawsuit Attorney Hip Implant Side Effects
Hip Replacement Implant Recall Information
Everything You Need To Know About Defective Hip Replacement Implant Recalls ... If you HAVE Questions About Any Information Here, Please Contact Us.
The FDA has received more than 17,000 complaints highlighting large-scale failure and side effects of hip implants in the last one decade. The metal particles released by these artificial hip implants have been blamed for cardiovascular, thyroid, metal poisoning, and nervous system problems, while their failure in less than expected time and fracture rates necessitated patients to undergo revision or secondary surgeries. In May 2011, the FDA called for complete assessment of safety concerns associated with metal hip implant systems and components of 21 manufacturers. Recalls over all these years prompted by regulator warnings and revelations of independent studies have led to filing of thousands of hip implant lawsuits claiming product liability against manufacturers. A Forbes report published in December 2011 estimated that the total number of hip implant lawsuits would cross 30,000, costing the industry $5 billion in settlements.
DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Implant Recall
DePuy Metal On Metal Hip Implant Lawsuit Updates
DePuy ASR Hip Implant Lawsuit: Latest Updates
DePuy ASR hip lawsuits seeking product liability damages against Johnson & Johnson are finally slated to undergo trial at various state and federal MDL courts. According to Bloomberg, more than 10,000 claims were filed across the United States until August 2012 and many more are expected to join. The manufacturer was forced to recall 37,000 DePuy ASR hip implants in the United States in August 2010 following the rising number of complaints citing device failure, metallosis, and other health complications. The hip implants shed metal debris, leading to surrounding tissue death and rising blood metal ion level, which put users at the risk of serious health complications.
DePuy ASR Hip Lawsuit: Court Trials
Ohio DePuy ASR Hip Lawsuit MDL
All DePuy ASR hip lawsuits filed in various federal courts across the United States are assigned to Judge David Katz of Ohio north district court under the MDL consolidation provision. The case management order dated July 26, 2012 set May 6, 2013 schedule for the first trial. The second trial is scheduled for July 8, 2013. According to the order, the court had agreed to hear a primary lawsuit brought by Faye Dorney-Madgitz of Cleveland and a secondary litigation filed by Ann McCracken to begin with.
Known as “bellwether trials,” dates are usually fixed following consolidation, where such complex widespread product liability litigations are filed claiming injury by one device. Most of the evidence and testimony are considered common to all cases, and jury decision in the first two lawsuits is likely to play a crucial role in the settlement and trial of subsequent DePuy ASR hip lawsuits.
New Jersey Superior Court
The next New Jersey DePuy ASR hip lawsuit status conference is scheduled for January 24, 2013 as a part of centralization proceeding. The first of 637 DePuy ASR hip lawsuits consolidated at New Jersey Superior Court will be held on September 9, 2013. The second will follow suit on October 21, 2013.
The first DePuy ASR hip lawsuit filed in New Jersey dates back to late 2010, a few months after Johnson & Johnson issued a global recall. Most of these have made claims citing design defects of these implants that enable release of metal particles into the blood, damage to the surrounding bone, and early device failure. The New Jersey Supreme Court ordered for the centralized management of all lawsuits following their rising number on April 12, 2011.
Maryland, Nevada, California
The first trial of DePuy ASR hip lawsuit ended with the plaintiff seeking to withdraw the litigation on January 7, 2013. According to Maryland Circuit Court documents, the pretrial settlement conference ended without any result on December 7, 2012 and a 12-meber jury was constituted to examine the $15 million claim. However, the plaintiff’s lawyer moved the court asking for permission to drop the lawsuit, and the judge approved it. There is speculation that the plaintiff is planning to file it in a federal court.
The case reminds of an incident involving a 2012 DePuy ASR hip lawsuit. It was to be tried in a Nevada court when the plaintiff dropped the claim after they reached a settlement just hours before the scheduled trial. Three DePuy ASR hip lawsuits scheduled for trial in a Nevada court on December 3, 2012 were also settled, with each plaintiff getting $200,000. The next date of DePuy ASR lawsuit trial is scheduled to be held in San Francisco on January 22, 2013.
Stryker Rejuvenate Hip Replacement Implant Recall Lawsuit
Stryker Rejuvenate Hip Implant Lawsuits
On January 25, a Stryker Rejuvenate class action lawsuit was filed in a south Florida federal court seeking free treatment and medical monitoring for people implanted with the recalled metal hip replacement devices. Michigan-based Stryker Orthopedics recalled its metal Rejuvenate Modular hip implants in June 2012 following widespread reports of metal poisoning, local tissue reactions, pain, premature device failure, and early modular-neck junction corrosion attributed to its design defects. The FDA received as many as 60 complaints on the hip implant failure, metallosis, infection, and bone necrosis in the four months preceding the recall.
An estimate released by Stryker Orthopedics in January 2013 puts the total costs the manufacture has to pay for personal injury lawsuits filed following the hip system recall at $390 million. The number of Stryker Rejuvenate hip lawsuits is expected to rise in the months ahead as more patients are coming forward seeking compensation for injury, pain, side effects, suffering caused by the device and reimbursement for medical and implant costs. In January 2013, the Supreme Court of New Jersey ordered for consolidated proceeding of all Stryker hip product liabilities filed in the state courts.
Stryker Rejuvenate Hip Implant: The System and Drawbacks
Stryker Rejuvenate hip implants were introduced in the United States in February 2010 following authorization through the FDA’s controversial 510(k) approval process. The procedure, which is being subject to strong criticism, permits introduction of new drugs or medical devices “substantially equivalent” to similar products already approved by the FDA for marketing and consumer use. Stryker introduced the Rejuvenate hip implants claiming that the system was similar to Profemur hip implants produced by Wright Medical Technology in design and offered superior intraoperative efficiency and flexibility.
The Stryker Rejuvenate hip implant system consists of the following three components
- A chromium-cobalt stem
- A non-metallic ball
- A titanium neck
The design of Stryker Rejuvenate hip implant system has been found defective and causes rubbing of metal components of the system against each other that discharges metal particles into the blood stream, putting users at the increased risk of metal poisoning. Many patients using these metal artificial hips have been diagnosed with high blood chromium and blood cobalt levels. Continuous and unusual fretting disables the metal parts early, and the devices last less than a quarter of the 15-year life span claimed by the manufacturer. Metal particles released from the artificial hip implants also cause infection, bone necrosis, and scar tissue and pseudotumor formation in and around the hip area.
The Wring Profemur hip implants with which Stryker Rejuvenate systems share design similarity have been subject to many lawsuits for their early failure, loosening of implants, consistent hip pain, and problem in walking or standing.
Stryker Rejuvenate Hip Implant: Major Side Effects
- Metallosis and toxicity
- Thyroid disorders
- Cardiovascular problems
- Hip area inflammation
- Metal poisoning leading to nervous system, gastrointestinal, cognitive disorders, vision and hearing problems, skin rashes, myocardiopathy, hypothyroidism, and death
- Sharp rise in cobalt and chromium ions in blood
- Peripheral soft tissue damage
- Nerve palsy and other side effects impacting normal nervous system functioning
- Device dislocation and chronic pain
- Premature device failure leading to secondary or revision surgery
- Bone necrosis and fractures
Stryker Rejuvenate Hip Implant Warnings
More than 17,000 complaints have been made through the FDA adverse reporting system, highlighting side effects and failure of metal hip implants in the last one decade. In May 2011, the FDA asked all metal artificial hip implant manufacturers, including Stryker, to conduct comprehensive safety assessment of its products fully reflecting safety concerns of consumers raised through complaints to the regulator.