The legislation proposes significant changes to how adverse health incidents are handled in the healthcare system. It establishes a new chapter in the Hawaii Revised Statutes dedicated to the CANDOR process. The CANDOR process enables healthcare providers to communicate transparently with patients about incidents, understand the contributing factors, and discuss preventative measures for the future. The bill also stipulates that any offers of compensation do not constitute an admission of liability, which could have implications for how legal claims are approached and resolved in the healthcare sector.
House Bill 2775, known as the CANDOR process legislation, aims to create a structured and confidential framework for healthcare providers and facilities in Hawaii to engage with patients who have experienced adverse healthcare incidents. This bill encourages open communication, allowing patients and their families to discuss incidents with healthcare professionals. This process is intended to enhance patient safety and expedite compensation where warranted while ensuring that such discussions remain confidential and do not imply liability on the part of the providers involved.
The sentiment around HB 2775 appears generally supportive, particularly among healthcare providers and entities interested in improving patient-provider relationships and ensuring better safety protocols. Advocates argue that fostering a culture of transparency will ultimately lead to better care and trust between patients and providers. However, concerns remain about the adequacy of patient rights protections in the event that issues arise during the conversation process, especially regarding the potential for conflict between confidentiality and legal recourse.
A key point of contention for critics may revolve around the balance between transparency and patient rights. While the CANDOR process aims to improve patient safety through open dialogue, some worry that the confidentiality provisions could restrict patients from pursuing legal action effectively if they feel their rights have been violated. The bill mandates that if patients accept compensation, they may be required to release their rights to sue, which could dissuade some from engaging in the process. This aspect has sparked discussions regarding the adequacy of the options available for patients seeking justice following adverse incidents.