Slow response turns a bad situation into a disaster
A 66-YEAR-OLD MAN on warfarin therapy for chronic atrial fibrillation and a transient ischemic attack underwent lithotripsy for kidney stones. Three days after the lithotripsy, he went to the ED complaining of severe flank pain. A computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen showed a large retroperitoneal hematoma and prominent perinephric and pararenal hemorrhages.
The patient remained on a gurney in the hallway of the ED in deteriorating condition until he was admitted to the intensive care unit, by which time his condition was critical. He died the next day.
PLAINTIFF’S CLAIM The ED physician and admitting urologists failed to monitor and treat the patient’s active hemorrhage for 9 hours. They didn’t order coagulation studies or respond to signs of escalating hemorrhagic shock. They failed to seek timely consults from surgery and interventional radiology.
THE DEFENSE No information about the defense is available.
VERDICT $825,000 Virginia settlement.
COMMENT Preventing complications of anticoagulation is hard enough; the lack of a timely response in this case made a bad outcome disastrous.
Were steps taken quickly enough?
SEVERE LOWER ABDOMINAL PAIN prompted a 52-year-old woman to go to the ED. She said she hadn’t had a bowel movement in almost a week. The ED physician, in consultation with the attending physician, admitted her to the hospital and ordered intravenous fluids and a soap suds enema, which didn’t relieve the constipation. The patient’s vital signs deteriorated, and she was crying and restless.
When the attending physician saw the patient almost 3 hours after admission, she had a fever of 101.4°F. He ordered additional tests, a computed tomography (CT) scan, and antibiotics, but didn’t order them STAT.
About 1½ hours later, a house physician examined the patient, and, after speaking with the attending physician, transferred her to a step-down telemetry unit. About 1½ hours after the transfer, a nurse called the house physician to report that the patient’s condition was worsening. The house physician ordered pain relievers and a second enema but didn’t come to the hospital.
Because the patient wasn’t in the intensive care unit, no one checked on her again for 3½ hours. When the nurse did check, she found the patient pale, cold, and turning blue. The nurse called the house physician, who came to the hospital. The patient had a fever of 102.4°F and her blood pressure couldn’t be measured.
After speaking with the attending physician, the house physician had the patient admitted to the ICU and also ordered a STAT surgical consultation and CT scan. In the meantime, the patient went into cardiac arrest and couldn’t be revived. Death was caused by peritonitis with sepsis resulting from a large intestinal obstruction.
PLAINTIFF’S CLAIM The patient showed early signs of sepsis. She should have undergone testing sooner and been transferred to the ICU earlier.
THE DEFENSE The doctors claimed that all their actions were appropriate and that the actions suggested by the plaintiff wouldn’t have resulted in the patient’s survival.
VERDICT $3.8 million Pennsylvania verdict.
COMMENT Prompt evaluation and monitoring of this patient might have prevented death and a substantial verdict.