Hospital Negligence - Tips from FOX News

Where will the ‘tort reformers’ (a.k.a. insurance companies looking to boost their bottom line) go if they lose the loyalty of their main media outlet? FOX News ran a story today entitled “Tips to Protect Yourself From Hospital Negligence.” The article addresses recent stories regarding infectious diseases being transferred to patients because the hospital and/or health care provider reused syringes, bottles of medication or dirty dental instruments. As a result, patients were infected with diseases such as hepatitis B and C as well as HIV. The article does offer a few good tips for ‘protecting’ yourself from infection at the hands of a negligent provider:

  • Demand that all health care personnel wash their hands in front of you before they render any physical service;
  • Demand that all health care personnel wear NEW gloves before drawing any blood;
  • Make sure your health care provider opens new needles from new packaging in your presence;
  • If any injectable medication is to be administered, it must come from a new bottle;
  • If you do not feel comfortable in your current setting, ask to speak to the infection control officer at your health facility. It is your right.

Still, one wonders, how can the patient be sure that medication comes from a ‘new bottle?’ The fact is that we must trust our health care professionals and, when the professional betrays that trust, hold them accountable. If the health care industry knows they’ll be held liable for negligence, then they’ll be certain to act in a way that doesn’t break such easy and common sense rules and needlessly exposes patients to danger. This is why ‘tort reform’ should never be embraced, it throws salt on the wound of the victim and eliminates the deterrent for the health care industry.

Nurses Strike Over Patient Safety Concerns

We often see nurses caught between hospital administration, doctor orders and patient care. Doctors usually say ‘my way or the highway.’ nurses who question the wisdom of treatment can find themselves shunned and scorned or, worse, find their jobs at risk. More alarming, nurses find themselves ‘understaffed’ and unable to provide care for the patients. In short, Hospitals choose to maximize profit by keeping the bare minimum of nurses on duty. This not only exposes patients to potential injury and death, it also puts a great deal of stress on the care giver, the nurse. Nurses at heart want to help people. When the hospital puts them in a position that they can’t do their jobs properly, and they know they can’t be so many different places at one time, this causes severe heartache for the nurse who knows that patients are being harmed.

Minnesota nurses stood up, fought back and went on strike. Interestingly, even though many nurses usually sit on the opposite of the table from our firm, their argument is the same as ours, that hospitals are putting profit over patient safety. Tell the hospital to get off their wallet and give you the care you deserve.

Negligent Credentialing Recognized

The Utah Supreme Court today formally recognized a cause of action for ‘negligent credentialing.’ This claim is based on the hospital’s failure to properly screen or review a surgeon’s competency, skills and abilities, or the hospital allowing a known incompetent surgeon to access their surgical facilities. Just as a trucking company must make sure that the driver holds the necessary skills to keep from endangering the driving public, so to must hospitals make sure that patients are not needlessly endangered by incompetent, unskilled or unprofessional surgeons. The worst case is when a surgeon has a drug or alcohol abuse problem, yet is allowed access to the surgical room. The hospital holds the keys to the surgery room. The hospital must make sure that those it allows in will not harm patients because they don’t have the skills, are operating outside their area of expertise, or are engaged in dangerous habits like drug abuse.

In Archuleta v. St. Mark’s Hospital, the hospital allowed a surgeon into the operating room who had previously been a defendant in many medical malpractice lawsuits. Even worse, St. Mark’s had previously been named as a co-defendant alongside the offending surgeon. As a result, a patient was exposed to the hand of an incompetent and unqualified surgeon who performed an open laparotomy to revise a gastric bypass. After that encounter, the patient suffered through over six corrective surgeries and more than three years with problems still arising to her stomach and bowels.

By making hospitals accountable for the people they let into their surgical facilities, the safety of patients will be improved.

The complete opinion can be read here.

Mount Ogden Golf Course - Dangerous Cart Paths

Should a City be able to put “zero thought” into the design of golf cart paths on a course, fail to maintain the steep and dangerous golf cart path and fail to keep records and then blame the patron when his or her golf car skids and flips on a steep, improperly banked and leaf covered cart path? A jury considered this question during a four day jury trial in Ogden Second District Court. The jurors concluded that Ogden City was negligent because they put no thought into the design of the cart path and failed to maintain that cart path once built. The jury didn’t let the golf cart driver off completely. Applying Utah’s comparative fault law, the jury concluded that Ogden City was 70% at fault, while the driver was 30% at fault for the injuries.

The driver’s injuries included a severely comminuted (shattered) elbow and upper arm, which required two different surgical procedures to repair. The second surgery took over 7 hours to complete and resulted in the placement of over 18 different screws, plates and wires to reconstruct the arm. The driver also suffers from post traumatic stress as a result of the tip over and his arm now lacks 30 degrees of motion in all directions, making it difficult to even turn a door knob. Medical expenses in the case were over $83,000 with lost wages greater than $6,600. Screen shot 2010-04-24 at 4-24-10 10.32.39 AM

Ogden City offered to settle the case for $6,600. After trial, the jury found damages to be $361,661.

We are proud to have represented the driver in this case and extend our sincere gratitude to the jury who carefully, thoughtfully and fully considered all the evidence in this case.

Nobody Is Immune

It doesn’t matter how much political power you wield, you will not be immune to death or injury from medical malpractice. Reports are surfacing that Congressman Murtha, who died this week following laparoscopic gallbladder surgery, may have been the victim of preventable medical error.

“According to a source close to Mr. Murtha -- confirming a report in Politico -- doctors inadvertently cut Mr. Murtha's intestine during the laparoscopic surgery, causing an infection.” You can read the full story here.

A pierced bowel case can arise following surgery for gall bladder removal. However, the difficulty arises when the pierced bowel goes untreated, allowing fecal content to leak into the abdominal cavity. Such a situation can quickly develop into a full blown infection, sepsis and lead to a septic shock. We know, because we have represented the loved ones and survivors of such tragic and unnecessary medical malpractice. If you have recently undergone any kind of abdominal surgery, watch for these signs and symptoms which may indicate you have a pierced bowel or other adverse complications needing immediate medical attention.

  • Tenderness in the abdomen/stomach
  • Sharp abdominal/stomach pain
  • Lack of bowel sounds/no bowel movements
  • Fever
  • Vomiting

If you recently underwent an abdominal, laparoscopic, laparotomy, endoscopy or colonoscopy procedure you may be at heightened risk for a perforated bowel or pierced intestine. If you develop symptoms such as above, get immediate medical attention. If you feel that you or a loved one has suffered because of negligent medical care, give us a call and we can discuss your case.