Bookmark and Share

Special Edition Legal Case Study


Healthcare Professionals and Medical Malpractice: A Case Study with Risk Management Strategies

Medical malpractice claims can be asserted against any healthcare provider. Although there may be a perception that physicians are held responsible for the majority of lawsuits, the reality is that healthcare professionals, including physical therapists, pharmacists and counselors are more frequently finding themselves defending the care they provide.


Physical Therapist Edition

Case Study: Improper Treatment Resulting in Burn and Scarring

The plaintiff was a 40-year old female receiving physical therapy following surgery to her ankle. The defendant physical therapist applied a hot pack to the affected area for pain relief. Subsequent to leaving the physical therapy center, the patient called to report a burn on her ankle at the site of the heat treatment. Read the Full Case with Risk Management Recommendations
 

Read Previous Issues of the HPSO Special Edition Legal Case Study: Physical Therapist Edition

Pharmacist Edition

Case Study: Alleged Failure to Require and Obtain Properly Completed Prescription Order Form; Failure to Inform Patient that Drug was Experimental in Oral Form; Failure to Adequately Inform Patient of Risks and Side Effects of Prescribed Experimental Medication

The 24 year old decedent/plaintiff had previously suffered severe leg injury and surgery resulting in chronic pain, restless leg syndrome and subsequent addiction to prescription medicine. He was receiving Methadone for unremitting pain. His physician ordered Ketamine tablets to be compounded and dispensed by the co-defendant pharmacy that employed the defendant pharmacist. (This is an "off-label" experimental form of Ketamine, as only injectable Ketamine is FDA approved.) Read the Full Case with Risk Management Recommendations
 

Read Previous Issues of the HPSO Special Edition Legal Case Study: Pharmacist Edition

Counselor Edition

Case Study: Negligent Treatment of Eating Disorder, Premature Discharge

The defendant counselor was a licensed chemical dependency and mental health counselor. He also owned (with his co-defendant spouse) the facility where the plaintiff was admitted for treatment of her eating disorder. The plaintiff was a 23-year-old female admitted to the defendant counselor's facility for treatment of depression and the eating disorder, anorexia. Read the Full Case with Risk Management Recommendations
 

Read Previous Issues of the HPSO Special Edition Legal Case Study: Counselors Edition



May 2012 Legal Case Study
Failure to Immediately Transport Man to Nearest Hospital Blamed for Exacerbation of Effects of Stroke - Defense Verdict.

The plaintiff, age forty-one, fell at home and became non-responsive. His family called 911. The plaintiff lived in a town near the border of two counties in his state. Paramedics from one county and EMTs from the second county responded.

The paramedics determined that this was not an advanced lifesaving incident and transferred the plaintiff’s care to the EMTs. The family wanted the plaintiff transported to the closest hospital, but the EMTs were informed that the nearest hospital was too busy to accept new patients and offered to take the plaintiff to the next closest hospital.

The family continued to insist on transport to the nearest hospital. The EMTs obtained a release from transport and the family took the man to the nearest hospital, where it was determined that he had suffered a stroke.

The plaintiff claimed that the nearest hospital was accepting new patients by ambulance and that the release not to transport was not proper because of a language barrier. The plaintiff claimed that there was a fifteen minute delay in getting the plaintiff to a hospital, which exacerbated his injuries and permanent paralysis.

The defendants denied any negligence and contended that the paramedics had determined that this was not an advanced lifesaving incident. The defendants also claimed that the EMTs had spoken with a bilingual family member on the phone, who had relayed the information to a family member in the home, following which the release was signed.

The EMTs claimed that there was no delay in obtaining treatment, but argued that any delay did not cause the plaintiff further injury.
According to a published account a defense verdict was returned.

With permission from Medical Malpractice Verdicts, Settlements & Experts; Lewis Laska, Editor, 901 Church St., Nashville, TN 37203-3411, 1-800-298-6288.

Search the Archives

By Topic
By Keyword