Get in Touch

Tag: Medical Negligence

Misdiagnosis Of Brain Infection

Posted on by Burton Bentley II, M.D FAAEM

In February 2018, Michigan teenager Marquel Brumley was diagnosed with a viral infection at an urgent care facility and was sent home for the infection to run its course.  When he started having migraines, emergency medicine doctors at the local hospital gave him over-the-counter pain medication and sent him home again. The migraines did not go away.  Then his mother took him to an Ann Arbor hospital but doctors there diagnosed simple migraines and he was again sent home. When Brumley’s face became swollen and lost muscle movement, doctors performed an MRI which revealed that a sinus infection had traveled to his brain. Brumley’s family was told that the sinus infection had penetrated through the bone into the blood vessels in the brain. He underwent surgery but blood clots had formed, cutting off oxygen to his brain. He died a few days later.

While sinus infections are common, Mayoclinic.org tells us that these viral infections can turn into meningitis, encephalitis, and/or a brain abscess.

Encephalitis often causes only mild flu-like signs and symptoms — such as a fever or headache — or no symptoms at all. Sometimes the flu-like symptoms are more severe. Encephalitis can also cause confused thinking, seizures, or problems with senses or movement… The inflammation can injure the brain, possibly resulting in coma or death…

Primary encephalitis occurs when a virus or other agent directly infects the brain. The infection may be concentrated in one area or widespread. A primary infection may be a reactivation of a virus that had been inactive after a previous illness.

The Encephalitis Society, https://www.encephalitis.info/, describes the seriousness of the neurological condition by saying that “unfortunately, despite improvements in specific and more supportive treatments such as excellent intensive care management, it still has a high mortality (death) rate… Even with the right treatment, certain types of encephalitis have mortality rates of between 10-30%.”

Emergency medicine physicians treat many life-threatening medical conditions. Misdiagnosis of a deadly condition such as encephalitis, meningitis, or a brain infection may result in medical malpractice litigation. Hiring an experienced board-certified emergency medicine expert witness from a top ranked medical center is an instrumental resource.  To secure an expert witness handpicked for your case, contact ELITE Medical Experts and speak with a board-certified physician on our staff.

Biojoint Litigation 1

Posted on by Burton Bentley II, M.D FAAEM

Two patients at the Mizzou Biojoint Center in Columbia, MO, have filed lawsuits alleging medical negligence following knee surgery. The 13th Judicial Circuit of Missouri lawsuit charges James Stannard, MD, medical director for the Mizzou Biojoint Center, and James Cook, DVM, PHD, OTSC, director of operations and scientific director of the center, with not disclosing that the surgeries were experimental.  Plaintiffs Amanda Reinsch and Daniel Draper were also not advised that Cook is not a medical doctor, nor was he a licensed physician at the time. The Mizzou Biojoint Center website states:

Mizzou BioJoint® solutions may be right for you if:

You are 55 or younger

You are nicotine-free

Your height to weight ratio falls within a BMI of 35 or less

Plaintiffs Reinsch and Draper allege that Stannard failed to tell them they were not proper candidates for the surgery. Their body mass indexes were both above 35 and Reinsch was not nicotine free.

Columbia Ortho Group describes the biojoint procedure:

Are biojoints really a transplant procedure?

Yes, the biojoint procedure is a transplant procedure. When an organ donor passes away, his/her organs, including their joints, are harvested. The joints are evaluated for diseases and treated for preservation by companies which specialize in preparing these parts for transplantation. The recipient patient with the arthritic joint is kept on a waiting list. When the appropriately sized bone and cartilage are available, the patient is called and arrangements are made to transplant the bone and cartilage promptly. Once the harvested bone and cartilage are available, it is common that there may only be forty-five to sixty days during which the transplant can be performed.

Draper was an active duty member of the U.S. Army. He underwent a second Mizzou Biojoint surgery when the first was unsuccessful. Draper eventually underwent a total knee replacement following the two unsuccessful biojoint surgeries. Draper states that he lost the ability to continue his career in the military and can no longer live independently.

Stannard recommended the Mizzou Biojoint surgery to Reinsch in 2016. She had pain following the procedure and had two additional follow up surgeries. A second opinion led to a total knee replacement by a different surgeon who found that Reinsch’s knee was infected with staph bacteria. She reports irreversible and permanent damage to her knee.

Orthopedic surgeons diagnose and treat diseases and injuries of bones, joints, ligaments, tendons, muscles, and nerves. Allegations of medical negligence usually stem from medical complications and/or poor surgical outcomes and a possible loss of function. Orthopedic surgery expert witnesses provide an unbiased opinion regarding the medical standard of care in these lawsuits. Contact ELITE Medical Experts to secure a leading orthopedic surgery expert from a major US academic medical center.

Surgical Instrument Left Inside

Posted on by Burton Bentley II, M.D FAAEM

Mary Harber of Susanville, CA, went to the hospital to have a benign tumor removed from her abdomen in April 2017. She is suing Shasta Regional Medical Center and Dr. Richard Mooney for medical negligence after an 8-inch long surgical instrument was left inside her during exploratory surgery. Dr. Mooney is an obstetrician-gynecologist in Redding, California, and is affiliated with multiple hospitals in the area, including Mercy Medical Center Redding and Shasta Regional Medical Center. Mrs. Harber was discharged from Shasta Regional on April 19, 2017, but experienced severe pain in her back, abdomen, and kidney.  ER doctors at Banner Lassen Medical Center discovered the forceps inside her on May 1, 2017.

The Joint Commission Sentinel Event Alert Issue 51: Preventing unintended retained foreign objects, (October 17, 2013) states:

The unintended retention of foreign objects (URFOs) – also called retained surgical items (RSIs) – after invasive procedures can cause death, and surviving patients may sustain both physical and emotional harm, depending on the type of object retained and the length of time it is retained. There may be an extended time frame between occurrence and detection of an URFO. Retained foreign objects are most commonly detected immediately post-procedure; by X-ray; during routine follow-up visits; or from the patient’s report of pain or discomfort.

An independent, not-for-profit organization, The Joint Commission accredits and certifies nearly 21,000 health care organizations and programs in the United States.

The medical negligence lawsuit says Harber had 18 inches of her small intestine removed after “it looped through the handle” of the forceps. The suit describes Harber as needing further medical care and asks for medical and incidental expenses as well as loss of earnings for the past and future.

Gynecologists treat a variety of conditions including cancer, infections, infertility, etc.  A gynecology expert witness is commonly needed in medical malpractice cases arising from these surgeries and surgical complications which may develop. Hiring a top medical expert from the nation’s most respected medical institutions adds a powerful voice to your litigation team. Contact ELITE Medical Experts to be connected with the expert witness who fits the needs of your case.

Affidavit Of Merit In Medical Negligence Lawsuits

Posted on by Burton Bentley II, M.D FAAEM

In 2012, Saint Francis Hospital, Inc., Neurological Surgery, Inc., and Douglas Koontz, M.D., performed decompressive laminectomies on Johnson John’s spine. After surgery, John allegedly became partially paralyzed, suffered constant pain, and was hospitalized for four months.  The patient filed suit alleging gross negligence and medical malpractice against the hospital, medical group, and surgeon for failure to render reasonable medical care and a breach in the duty of care.  The respondents argued that the plaintiff had not submitted an “affidavit of merit” and argued that the case be dismissed.

In Johnson John, Respondent, v. Saint Francis Hospital, Inc., Neurological Surgery, Inc. and Douglas Koontz, M.D., Petitioners, the Supreme Court of the State of Oklahoma stated:

On July 8, 2016, Patient averred that the statutory directive unconstitutionally restrained a litigant’s right to access the courts and was an unconstitutional special law. On August 5, 2016, the district court provided notice to the Attorney General’s office concerning the challenged statute. As intervenor, the Attorney General filed its notice to the court and supplemental authority on October 11, 2016, essentially urging the district court to enforce the affidavit requirements. After hearing arguments and reviewing the parties’ submissions, the district court overruled Appellants’ motions to dismiss. In doing so, the district court rejected Patient’s special law challenge but determined that, section 19.1 unconstitutionally imposes a substantial and impermissible impediment to access to the courts. This barrier is unconstitutional regardless of the financial worth of a litigant and is not cured by exercising the indigent from this burden.

In Now It’s Easier for Patients in Two States to Sue, Wayne J. Guglielmo, Medscape – Nov 17, 2017, wrote commentary:

Laws in two states aimed at cutting down on what critics charge are frivolous or nonmeritorious lawsuits have run into constitutional roadblocks, as separate stories posted on the websites of the Insurance Journal and the Lexington Herald-Leader report.

In Oklahoma, the Supreme Court ruled that a state law requiring that an “affidavit of merit” be submitted when filing a medical negligence action is unconstitutional. The law, part of a larger statute governing professional negligence, set out three steps for prospective plaintiffs to follow:

  • Have a qualified expert review the facts of the claim;
  • Have that expert submit a written opinion that the defendant’s actions or omissions constituted negligence; and
  • Based on that opinion, conclude that the claim being filed is meritorious and based on good cause.

In two previous cases involving the same law, the high court had ruled that the affidavit requirement “imposes a substantial and impermissible impediment to access to the courts.” In the current case—John v Saint Francis Hospital, in which a surgeon filed a motion to dismiss the case because a plaintiff had failed to follow the affidavit requirement—the court reached a similar conclusion, noting that the law places “an impermissible barrier on a plaintiff’s guaranteed right to court access.”

Guglielmo also writes, “In sending the case back to the district court, the justices further noted: ‘The obvious purpose of the affidavit requirement reflects the Legislature’s desire to deter and weed out non-meritorious negligence claims…. But, in spite of its successive enactments, the Legislature has failed to remedy the inequalities this Court continues to identify as problematic in its prior decisions.”

 

Are Audio and Visual Recordings of Surgeries The Future?

Posted on by Burton Bentley II, M.D FAAEM

Wisconsin Representative Christine Sinicki formally introduced a bill December 7th that would allow patients to request audio and visual recordings of their surgical procedures. Assembly Bill 255 states:

This bill creates a requirement for hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers, or any other places where surgical procedures are performed (surgical facilities) to offer surgical patients the option to have their surgical procedures videotaped. Surgical facilities must provide notice of the option and all related procedures and conditions set forth in the bill. For purposes of this bill, a surgical procedure is one for which a patient is given a general anesthetic.

Representative Sinicki named the bill “Julie’s Law” to honor Julie Ayer Rubenzer, a 38-year-old woman who died in 2003. Medical records show that her heart stopped during breast augmentation surgery and that doctors waited several minutes before starting chest compressions. She died three months later. Her family charged the doctor with malpractice, stating that there was no anesthesiologist present and the surgeon had no license in anesthesia.

The bill also allows a physician or certain other individual who holds a valid
license or other credential that allows him or her to perform surgical procedures for
which a patient is under general anesthesia (surgical practitioner) and who is
scheduled to perform a surgical patient’s surgical procedure to request that a
recording be made, and a surgical facility must comply with the request so long as
certain conditions are met, including that the surgical patient or person authorized
by the patient does not object. Under the bill, in certain limited emergency
circumstances, surgical facilities are not required to provide the option of recording.

Opponents of the bill include the Wisconsin Medical Society and the Wisconsin Hospital Association. See Assembly Bill 255,  “Relating to video recording of surgical procedures, providing an exemption from emergency rule procedures, granting rule-making authority, requiring the exercise of rule-making authority, and providing penalties” here.

The Linchpin of Your Malpractice Case

Posted on by Burton Bentley II, M.D FAAEM

Medical malpractice payouts in the US topped $3.8 billion in 2016, according to a report by malpractice insurance provider Diederich Healthcare. Expert testimony plays a crucial role in even the most open-and-shut malpractice cases. Here’s how you can build your strongest case with a medical malpractice expert witness. Continue reading “The Linchpin of Your Malpractice Case”

Twenty-Six Unnecessary Radiation Treatments on the Wrong Side

Posted on by Burton Bentley II, M.D FAAEM

What is an otolaryngologist? These professionals are trained in the medical and surgical management and treatment of patients with diseases and disorders of the ear, nose, throat, and related structures of the head and neck. They are commonly referred to as ENT physicians. Their specialized skills include diagnosing and managing diseases of the sinuses, larynx, oral cavity, and upper pharynx (mouth and throat), as well as structures of the neck and face.

The American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery describes the otolaryngologist’s areas of expertise.

The Ears — Hearing loss affects one in ten North Americans. The unique domain of otolaryngologists is the treatment of ear disorders. They are trained in both the medical and surgical treatment of hearing, ear infections, balance disorders, ear noise (tinnitus), nerve pain, and facial and cranial nerve disorders. Otolaryngologists also manage congenital (birth) disorders of the outer and inner ear.

The Nose — About 35 million people develop chronic sinusitis each year, making it one of the most common health complaints in America. Care of the nasal cavity and sinuses is one of the primary skills of otolaryngologists. Management of the nasal area includes allergies and sense of smell. Breathing through, and the appearance of, the nose are also part of otolaryngologists’ expertise.

The Throat — Communicating (speech and singing) and eating a meal all involve this vital area. Also specific to otolaryngologists is expertise in managing diseases of the larynx (voice box) and the upper aero-digestive tract or esophagus, including voice and swallowing disorders.

The Head and Neck — This center of the body includes the important nerves that control sight, smell, hearing, and the face. In the head and neck area, otolaryngologists are trained to treat infectious diseases, both benign and malignant (cancerous) tumors, facial trauma, and deformities of the face. They perform both cosmetic plastic and reconstructive surgery.

Allegations of medical negligence against ENTs may arise following treatment for head and neck cancer, as well as complications of surgical procedures such as tonsillectomy, tracheostomy, and thyroidectomy.

In February 2015, Pennsylvania resident Kathleen Astleford’s family physician referred her to an ENT specialist at Delta Medix for an evaluation of her throat. A physician at Delta performed a biopsy of Astleford’s right tonsil which revealed squamous cell carcinoma. She was referred to Dr. Andrew Turrrisi who ordered radiation treatments.

Astleford wore protection during radiation which limited her view of the treatments. When she developed sores on the left side of her mouth and tongue, she questioned Dr. Turrisi because the cancer had been found in her right tonsil. After twenty-six unnecessary radiation treatments on the wrong side of her tonsils, he admitted his mistake and performed 17 radiation treatments on the correct side. Astleford was not told of the risk involved in a total of 43 radiation sessions. Finally, she had surgery that removed part of her tongue and left her unable to swallow properly. The case is Astleford v. Delta Medix, P.C., Delta Medix, P.C. t/a The Center for Comprehensive Cancer Care and Dr. Andrew Turrisi, M.D., 15-CV-5134 (C.P. Lackawanna County.Co. 2016 Gibbons, J.).   

Litigation against an ENT physician requires consultation from an otolaryngologist expert witness who specializes in this area of medicine. These experts are knowledgeable and experienced in ENT clinical practice guidelines and can use these benchmarks to assist them in evaluating whether proper treatment decisions or methods of care were followed. Contact ELITE Medical Experts to be connected with the most accomplished, unbiased, and persuasive medical expert witness for your case.

Allegations of ER Triage Negligence

Posted on by Burton Bentley II, M.D FAAEM

Emergency room treatment is exacting and fast-paced. When treatment deviates from the medical standard of care, errors may lead to serious or fatal injuries. Three of the most common errors alleged in ER medicine negligence cases are misdiagnosis, failure to provide proper treatment and inadequate patient tracking (triage). The family of a 52-year-old man is suing Cayuga Medical Center at Ithaca, NY, following his death in the hospital’s ER.  He was triaged at level four, which is classified as “less urgent.” However, the complaint states that the nurse never checked his vital signs. Two hours after his arrival at the hospital, he was found dead in the waiting room.

Allen Phelps, brother of the deceased, filed a lawsuit naming the supervising emergency room physician, Dr. Steven Elliott, the Cayuga Medical Center, Cayuga Emergency Physicians LLP, as well as two nurses and the receptionist. The complaint alleges that the hospital was understaffed and was negligent in training staff in proper ER procedures. As a result, staff did not monitor Mr. Phelps properly or give him appropriate care. The complaint states:

Upon information and belief, when decedent first arrived at Defendant Center, Defendants failed to appropriately assess and triage the decedent before referring the decedent to the waiting room which are deviations from accepted medical standards and against hospital policy and procedure…

Upon information and belief, many complaints were made to Defendant Center about it having insufficient staffing and that patients were at risk of injury prior to January 19, 2017, and Defendant Center did nothing about it.

Medical malpractice litigation is complex and can take several years to settle. Most states require plaintiffs to have a medical expert witness who is qualified to testify regarding the standard of care the patient received. These experts evaluate medical records and testify as to whether protocol was breached and may have resulted in harm to the patient. Contact ELITE Medical Experts to speak directly with a physician or nurse who will connect you with the exact resources for your case.

 

Concurrent Surgeries & The Orthopedic Surgery Expert Witness

Posted on by Burton Bentley II, M.D FAAEM

A Boston jury has determined that a spine surgeon, did not cause his patient’s quadriplegia following surgery in 2012. The surgeon, Chief of orthopedic spine service, performed two complicated surgeries during the same time frame. The patient sued the surgeon for malpractice following an eleven hour surgery that left him paralyzed. The jury concluded that the doctor’s divided attention did not cause the patient’s quadriplegia.

Concerns over concurrent and overlapping surgeries have come to the attention of hospitals and the public. The Senate Finance Committee released a report in December 2016 that calls for a ban on concurrent surgeries and more regulations on overlapping surgeries. The Senate Finance Committee has jurisdiction over the Medicare and Medicaid programs and part of its oversight responsibility is to improve patient safety and transparency. In December 2015, Committee staff became aware of overlapping, concurrent, and simultaneous surgeries reported in a Boston Globe article. The American College of Surgeons Statements on Principles, revised April 12, 2016, found that “A primary attending surgeon’s involvement in concurrent or simultaneous surgeries on two different patients in two different rooms is not appropriate.”

In the case Boston case, the jury found that while the spine surgeon failed to inform the patient that he planned to operate on two patients at once, the jury decided that the doctor’s divided attention did not cause his quadriplegia. Judge Edward Leibensperger instructed jurors that they could only consider whether the medical treatment the patient received “deviated from established standards of care and caused his injury” (Boston Globe, 1/30/2017). Judge Leibensperger is a member of the Business Litigation Session of the Superior Court of Massachusetts.

When the attending surgeon is managing more than one case at the same time, he or she may be away from one of those patients for an extended period of time.  If complications arise, the patient may question whether “double-booking” was an appropriate medical procedure and bring allegations of medical negligence.

A 2019 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association showed nearly 12 percent of the 66,000 operations studied had some overlap with another case. For the majority of overlapping surgeries, we found no increase in deaths or overall complications compared to surgeries that did not overlap.  A subset of complications — major complications such as stroke and heart attack — were slightly higher.

The study found small increases in deaths and complications for overlapping surgeries involving coronary artery bypass grafting and high-risk patients. In both of these groups, small errors in surgical care could have harmful effects.