Understanding Audit Trails in Healthcare Litigation
Comperio Legal Services provides skilled attorneys the electronic medical record analysis and expert witnesses they need to win. Do you have an expert understanding of the risk posed by the electronic medical records in your case? Discover the truth. Schedule your FREE, no-obligation case consultation today.
Understanding Audit Trails in Healthcare Litigation
How Audit Trails Can Make or Break Your Case
Audit trails are essential in healthcare litigation, providing digital footprints that track every modification in an Electronic Medical Record (EMR). Understanding audit trails can uncover crucial details in medical malpractice and other legal cases. In this newsletter, we’ll explore:
• The importance of audit trails in legal proceedings
• How metadata can reveal inconsistencies
• Key questions attorneys should ask when reviewing an EMR
Audit trails are a game-changer in medical malpractice and health law cases, providing an unalterable record of who accessed, modified, or deleted patient information in an EMR. These digital footprints can expose inconsistencies, verify timelines, and reveal whether critical records were altered or omitted if you can interpret the information.
The Importance of Audit Trails in Legal Proceedings
Audit trails can establish whether a provider accessed a patient’s chart before making a critical decision or if an entry was altered after an adverse event. For example, in a wrongful death case, an audit trail may reveal that a critical lab result was available hours before a provider viewed or acknowledged it—contradicting claims that they acted promptly. Similarly, if a hospital claims a nurse followed proper protocol, an audit trail can confirm whether and when those actions were documented—or if they were added later to cover up negligence. Audit trails are key to proving or disproving liability as they provide objective proof of whether a healthcare provider’s documented actions align with their testimony.
How Metadata Can Reveal Inconsistencies
Metadata, or “data about data”, provides more context to user actions and events captured in an audit trail. It shows not only who accessed a record but also how long they spent reviewing it, what changes were made, and when those changes occurred when considered across a series of audit trail events. A doctor reviewing a patient’s vitals or labs for only a second before ordering a high-risk medication may indicate a lack of thorough review, which could be critical evidence in a negligence claim. A single event in isolation doesn’t tell the full story, but reviewing multiple events in close proximity paints a more complete picture and reconstruction of a user’s actions at the heart of the issue. Patterns in audit logs can indicate suspicious activity, such as repeated access to a patient’s record by after a sentinel event occurred by the patient’s provider or modifications to a medical record that occur outside of a generally acceptable documentation correction window.
Key Questions Attorneys Should Ask When Reviewing an EMR
Every medical malpractice case is unique but there are some consistent questions to ask that will strengthen or weaken theories:
- Who accessed the record and from where?
- Were any entries backdated or deleted?
- Were clinical notes signed multiple times or modified after the fact?
- What modifications were made to the record after the alleged malpractice event?
- Did a provider access the patient’s record at the time they claimed to have reviewed it?
These questions can uncover manipulation, omissions, or inconsistencies that impact case strategy. A strong case starts with the right data. Answering these questions can help attorneys identify red flags and improve the odds of winning their case.
Not all audit trails are created equal. If you need expert analysis of your EMR audit trail, contact us today.
