So, one would think that doctors would also know when to wash their hands. After using the bathroom, before eating and before going into surgery, right?

Not so fast. A recent study shows that doctors-in-training may not know everything there is to know about hand washing while practicing medicine and operating on patients. Questions posed to medical students in the survey included whether to wash after touching vomit, removing gloves and touching a patient's bed. Of the medical students questioned, only one-fifth were able to get them all right.

Thus, people who find themselves in the hospital for one reason can end up leaving the hospital with an entirely different problem, all because their doctors didn't know when they should wash their hands.

Because doctors are professionals, they are expected to know more than the ordinary person about the tools of their trade and the safety requirements involved in the medical field. And when a professional, like doctors, falls below the standard of care required in their profession - including proper hand washing procedures - those professionals can be held liable for injuries and damages caused by their lack of knowledge or lack of care.

A doctor falling below the standard of care is known as medical malpractice, and patients who become sick or injured because of a doctor falling below the required standard of care can benefit from an attorney experienced in medical malpractice to help protect their rights and recover any monetary damages for their injuries.

Recently, concerns of this nature were raised about the cancer drug Doxil.

• A 10-gallon can filled with urine was found in a storage room
• Air sampling revealed microbial contamination and the manufacturer could not identify the source
• The company could not show that its product meets acceptable levels of sterility
• The company was behind on at least 107 required preventative maintenance activities
• Quality-control staff lacked proper training, expertise and oversight

Doxil is supposed to be a sterile drug. It is prescribed to patients who suffer from ovarian cancer, bone cancer and an HIV-related cancer known as Kaposi's sarcoma. Many of these patients have compromised immune systems as a result of their illness and its accompanying treatment. An unanticipated bacterial or viral infection could cause serious harm.

To make matters worse, Doxil was in short supply, even before the investigation. Approximately 2,000 patients currently receive the drug, but another 2,240 are on a waiting list.

The wait will now be even longer. Ben Venue - Doxil's manufacturer - has suspended production while it works to remedy the deficiencies.

When manufacturers cut corners on safety, innocent people suffer. We owe our vulnerable citizens better than to provide them with dangerous or defective drugs.

In an effort to crack down on Medicare fraud, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force arrested and charged 111 people for participation in fraud schemes. According to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Department of Justice (DOJ) officials, the 111 arrested were accused of defrauding the government to the tune of $225 million.

In response to the coordinated arrests, Attorney General Eric Holder stated: "We have safeguarded precious taxpayer dollars. And we have helped to protect our nation's most essential healthcare programs, Medicare and Medicaid."

Secretary Kathleen Sebelius commented on the success of efforts to recover money taken in Medicare fraud schemes: "From 2008-2010, every dollar the federal government spent under its Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Programs averaged a return on investment of $6.80."

Medicare fraud isn't covered by just one statute. Statutes such as the Social Security Act and the False Claims Act make it a crime to commit Medicare Fraud. Many of the statutes that encompass Medicare fraud impose fines and prison terms on those found guilty of running afoul of the law.

Sources: Medicare Fraud: 111 US Doctors, Nurses Arrested; Operation Targets $225M in Healthcare Fraud

The CDC report found that almost half of cervical and colorectal cancers (colon cancer or large bowel cancer) and a third of breast-cancer cases are caught at late stages.

With the prevalence of screening tests available at doctors' offices across the country, one cannot but help wonder why cancer isn't being detected earlier.

Effective screening can lead to early detection and treatment, but researchers note that screening tests are not always perfect or consistent. For example, mammograms don't catch all tumors - sometime cancerous spots do not appear on x-rays. And many tests themselves carry risks, such as possible complications during a screening procedure.

And the CDC's study does not accurately measure whether the individuals who were screened for cancer were directed to do so by their doctors or requested the tests on their own. Responsibility for proper cancer diagnosis and screening falls largely on doctors, as the average patient won't likely inquire about screening tests - they expect their physicians to recommend when they need additional testing.

The CDC's findings reinforce the need for ongoing monitoring of available screening and incidents of cancer. "More work is needed to widely implement evidence-based cancer screening tests which may lead to early detection and, ultimately, an increase in the number of lives saved," said CDC Cancer Prevention Division Direction Marcus Plescia.

Sources: CDC: Nearly Half of Cervical and Colorectal Cancers Caught Late; Surveillance of Screening-Detected Cancers (Colon and Rectum, Breast, and Cervix)

About 90 percent of medical devices in the U.S. gain clearance under an FDA program called 510(k), which is intended to speed approval for products considered to have a moderate safety risk and to be similar to devices already cleared for sale in the U.S. This is a faster and cheaper way for medical-device makers to get their products to the market.

The agency is reviewing its safety regulations and has proposed many changes in the approval process for a majority of medical devices, especially the 510(k) program. Jeffrey Shuren, director of the FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health, said process revisions are needed because the program has not had a major update in over 30 years.

Most contested is a proposal to create a new category of medium-risk products that would require more studies on safety before clearance is granted.

The Advanced Medical Technology Association, or Advamed, is a Washington-based trade group that opposes many of the FDA's proposed changes. A statement released by the organization stated that, while the revisions could increase efficiency and consistency in the review process, they also may reduce investment in start-up companies and delay the delivery of health care products to patients.

Revised to Prove Safety?

However, other groups say the current FDA approval program does not always require enough evidence of safety to ensure that people will not be injured by unsafe medical devices. A doctor at the University of California, San Francisco who is also editor of the Archives of Internal Medicine argued that there is currently a "proliferation" of medical devices used in the U.S. without data to demonstrate that they are safe and effective.

In addition, Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group, would like the FDA to require clinical studies for all medical devices that are "implantable, life-sustaining or life-supporting" to prevent injury from defective products.

Shuren pointed out that regulation changes may not result in more studies being required from medical-device makers initially. He said those types of changes are currently being considered on a case-by-case basis when it is appropriate and necessary and expects the agency to announce its final changes by the end of 2010.

Source: Medical Device Makers, U.S. Regulators Spar Over Rule