CNN: 10 shocking medical mistakes

SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/09/health...html?hpt=hp_c3

Originally Posted by GladifImakeit

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/09/health...html?hpt=hp_c3

Half of these aren't even medical mistakes and only a few of them could be really called "shocking". Some of them are just stupid...some dude fractures his skull and breaks his leg SKYDIVING and then picks up a nosocomial infection?

10 looks like a legit medical mistake. I feel bad for the guy. I bet the nurse didn't even lose her job over it.

12 isn't necessarily malpractice nor was it avoidable. I mean... he fractured his head. On what I presume was the ground. What do you expect?

Who want's a personal account?

Brother needed a gastrostomy tube replaced - surgeon placed a foley catheter by mistake. No port to administer medications through, which was necessary in lieu of poor peripheral vein access. Received no medications to control existing seizure disorder for 2 days. Foley catheters go in the bladder, not the stomach. This was a surgeon who said SI segmentation order is Jejunum, Duodenum, Ileum. I had to correct her: that's when I knew something would go wrong.

Originally Posted by StarlingForce1

Who want's a personal account?

Brother needed a gastrostomy tube replaced - surgeon placed a foley catheter by mistake. No port to administer medications through, which was necessary in lieu of poor peripheral vein access. Received no medications to control existing seizure disorder for 2 days. Foley catheters go in the bladder, not the stomach. This was a surgeon who said SI segmentation order is Jejunum, Duodenum, Ileum. I had to correct her: that's when I knew something would go wrong.

Wow...bad luck to get like the worst surgeon of all time. As soon as she couldn't name the SI sections right I'd be asking for a different surgeon.

I had a friend a couple of years ago survive a bad motorcycle accident only to get MRSA in the hospital and almost die from that instead of his accident injuries. Not necessarily a medical mistake, but it sure would suck to die from an infection you got from being in the hospital that pretty much already saved your life from the trauma.

Yeah, they couldn't even round out their list with real medical mistakes so they throw in some non-physician stories and an Alzheimer's patient wandering off. Seems like a stretch to me.

Originally Posted by LossForWords

Yeah, they couldn't even round out their list with real medical mistakes so they throw in some non-physician stories and an Alzheimer's patient wandering off. Seems like a stretch to me.

They were talking about all medical errors, not just those by physicians. I would consider it an error on the part of both the doctors and nurses to lose track of a severely senile patient and not notice for days. They have a responsibility to care for patients who are totally dependent on others, like children and the elderly. That includes looking for them when they inexplicably go missing and can't take care of themselves.

Originally Posted by Go Ducks

They were talking about all medical errors, not just those by physicians. I would consider it an error on the part of both the doctors and nurses to lose track of a severely senile patient and not notice for days. They have a responsibility to care for patients who are totally dependent on others, like children and the elderly. That includes looking for them when they inexplicably go missing and can't take care of themselves.

Completely agree 100% with this.

Originally Posted by calvnandhobbs68

Half of these aren't even medical mistakes and only a few of them could be really called "shocking". Some of them are just stupid...some dude fractures his skull and breaks his leg SKYDIVING and then picks up a nosocomial infection?

Did you Google the patients case or is the mobile version abridged? I don't think I'm reading the same things you guys are lol

Originally Posted by StarlingForce1

Who want's a personal account?

Brother needed a gastrostomy tube replaced - surgeon placed a foley catheter by mistake. No port to administer medications through, which was necessary in lieu of poor peripheral vein access. Received no medications to control existing seizure disorder for 2 days. Foley catheters go in the bladder, not the stomach. This was a surgeon who said SI segmentation order is Jejunum, Duodenum, Ileum. I had to correct her: that's when I knew something would go wrong.

Foleys can be used as a temporary g-tube, until the correct g-tube replacement is found. It's usually the ER doc that places a Foley and the surgeon can replace it with a real one in the office.

Originally Posted by tkim

Foleys can be used as a temporary g-tube, until the correct g-tube replacement is found. It's usually the ER doc that places a Foley and the surgeon can replace it with a real one in the office.

Yeah, except this wasn't an ER doc - it was a staff GI surgeon. After my brother had been admitted. 4 days after visiting the ER.

Originally Posted by StarlingForce1

Yeah, except this wasn't an ER doc - it was a staff GI surgeon. After my brother had been admitted. 4 days after visiting the ER.

GI and surgery are two different specialties.

Again, Foleys can be used as a temporary replacement for G-tubes. Don't know why it was used in your situation, but it's not a ridiculous thing to do as long as it is eventually replaced with a real G-tube.

Originally Posted by SpecterGT260

Did you Google the patients case or is the mobile version abridged? I don't think I'm reading the same things you guys are lol

Can you see the slideshow at the top? Might not be able to on the mobile version but that's where all the info about each case actually is.

Originally Posted by calvnandhobbs68

Can you see the slideshow at the top? Might not be able to on the mobile version but that's where all the info about each case actually is.

no, i couldnt. I can check it out now though. thanks

Originally Posted by tkim

GI and surgery are two different specialties.

Again, Foleys can be used as a temporary replacement for G-tubes. Don't know why it was used in your situation, but it's not a ridiculous thing to do as long as it is eventually replaced with a real G-tube.

It was not done with intent of replacing with a G-tube, however. Because it doesn't take 5 months to recover from that surgery, and thats when a G-tube was placed, and it was not a scheduled placement. interestingly enough, it was in the emergency room, because the foley catheter popped out.

Originally Posted by StarlingForce1

It was not done with intent of replacing with a G-tube, however. Because it doesn't take 5 months to recover from that surgery, and thats when a G-tube was placed, and it was not a scheduled placement. interestingly enough, it was in the emergency room, because the foley catheter popped out.

...just stop. Trust me, if you get into med school (presuming you're pre-med) then in a few years you'll have a completely different perspective of what was going on. Tkim was trying to explain it to you but I'm not sure if you know enough yet to understand what he's saying.

This one cracks me up:

6. Mistake: Air bubbles in blood
• Cause: The hole in a patient's chest isn't sealed airtight after a chest tube is removed.
• Consequences: Air bubbles get sucked into the wound and cut off blood supply to the patient's lungs, heart, kidneys and brain. Left uncorrected the patient dies.
• Prevention: If you have a chest tube in you, ask how you should be positioned when the line comes out.
• Example case: Blake Fought

Air embolus from chest tube removal? I'll give you residual pneumo, but it sounds like the chest tube was in the aorta.

This is easily one of the worst articles I've ever read.

Originally Posted by Mr Cookie Pants

Air embolus from chest tube removal? I'll give you residual pneumo, but it sounds like the chest tube was in the aorta.

This is easily one of the worst articles I've ever read.

Yeah, it wasn't really accurate. The patient in question actually had a central line that was not pulled correctly, and he did get an air embolus as a result of the nurse's mistake.

(As an aside, the patient in question was the son of a former SDN moderator: http://studentdoctor.net/the-blake-e...l-scholarship/)

This may be a viewpoint that is not received well but.....

has anyone considered that by the time people land in the hospital (inpatient) that most of the time they were going to die anyways without intervention? Medical mistakes should absolutely be minimized and they are tragic, but from a certain point of view many of these people essentially ended up where they would have been anyways without doctors involved. This has always just been a point in the back of my mind when I talk about medical mistakes.

Originally Posted by SpecterGT260

This may be a viewpoint that is not received well but.....

has anyone considered that by the time people land in the hospital (inpatient) that most of the time they were going to die anyways without intervention? Medical mistakes should absolutely be minimized and they are tragic, but from a certain point of view many of these people essentially ended up where they would have been anyways without doctors involved. This has always just been a point in the back of my mind when I talk about medical mistakes.

I think that all the time.

The number of deaths is not at all the most relevant measurement. What would be really useful is the number of years of quality life lost, and in how many patients. When an 89-year old fractures their hip, has emergency surgery, then has an MI, then spends two weeks in the ICU, and acquires a UTI, becomes septic and dies, then I don't really consider that the same as "Oops, we gave your otherwise healthy child 100,000 units of heparin instead of a 10 unit flush, and she just had a fatal head bleed."

For one, the elderly patient in such a scenario would have died without our help, so there's a difference in "We tried dozens of interventions that weren't working, and then one came with a fatal complication" versus "Oops, sorry about that! Cut off the wrong leg!"

I have a few quetions

1) is it true that most doctors will make at least one bad (severly reduce quality of life in his patient) mistake in their career?

2) will most doctors get sued at least once in their career?

3) how many doctors make a fatal error (any type of doc, surgeons slipping etc or doc giving wrong medicine,etc)


I'm not sure if there are numbers on these things but I am still curious

Originally Posted by Venom5

I have a few quetions

1) is it true that most doctors will make at least one bad (severly reduce quality of life in his patient) mistake in their career?

2) will most doctors get sued at least once in their career?

3) how many doctors make a fatal error (any type of doc, surgeons slipping etc or doc giving wrong medicine,etc)


I'm not sure if there are numbers on these things but I am still curious

Most surgeons will get sued at least once in their lifetime. A general surgeon has a 99% chance of being sued, and a neurosurgeon is the same. After that, OB/gyn and anesthesia are not far behind.

Will you cause a patient's death? Maybe. You'll almost certainly miss something or make the wrong decision in a life-or-death situation, and it might accelerate the patient's death or fail to slow it down. You will not always have time to sit down and plan things out in a neat and organized fashion, and some split-second decisions will be wrong (or at least sub-optimal).

Originally Posted by TheProwler

Most surgeons will get sued at least once in their lifetime. A general surgeon has a 99% chance of being sued, and a neurosurgeon is the same. After that, OB/gyn and anesthesia are not far behind.

Will you cause a patient's death? Maybe. You'll almost certainly miss something or make the wrong decision in a life-or-death situation, and it might accelerate the patient's death or fail to slow it down. You will not always have time to sit down and plan things out in a neat and organized fashion, and some split-second decisions will be wrong (or at least sub-optimal).

So how can you cope with something like that afterwards?

Originally Posted by smq123

Yeah, it wasn't really accurate. The patient in question actually had a central line that was not pulled correctly, and he did get an air embolus as a result of the nurse's mistake.

(As an aside, the patient in question was the son of a former SDN moderator: http://studentdoctor.net/the-blake-e...l-scholarship/)

I was going to bring up the fact that one of these was the son of an SDN moderater as soon as I saw him on the list. You beat me to it. Again, my heart goes out to her family.

///

Originally Posted by TheProwler

I think that all the time.

The number of deaths is not at all the most relevant measurement. What would be really useful is the number of years of quality life lost, and in how many patients. When an 89-year old fractures their hip, has emergency surgery, then has an MI, then spends two weeks in the ICU, and acquires a UTI, becomes septic and dies, then I don't really consider that the same as "Oops, we gave your otherwise healthy child 100,000 units of heparin instead of a 10 unit flush, and she just had a fatal head bleed."

For one, the elderly patient in such a scenario would have died without our help, so there's a difference in "We tried dozens of interventions that weren't working, and then one came with a fatal complication" versus "Oops, sorry about that! Cut off the wrong leg!"

along these same lines, did you see the thread about the doctor who was found 60% liable for the cop who died of a heart condition during a 3-way with a hooker? "Failed to properly diagnose the heart condition". This is somewhat what i was getting at earlier. It is unreasonable to expect us to catch 100% of everything 100% of the time. So I think it is ridiculous to also hold us liable if a condition goes undetected. By odds alone we are inevitably playing a game of russian roulette

Originally Posted by Go Ducks

They were talking about all medical errors, not just those by physicians. I would consider it an error on the part of both the doctors and nurses to lose track of a severely senile patient and not notice for days. They have a responsibility to care for patients who are totally dependent on others, like children and the elderly. That includes looking for them when they inexplicably go missing and can't take care of themselves.

The article was pretty vague but it sounds like they realized she was missing pretty quickly, they just didn't find her for days. (Not the same thing as "not noticing"). Still they should be held accountable especially if they are going to accept patients who are prone to wandering off.

Originally Posted by SpecterGT260

along these same lines, did you see the thread about the doctor who was found 60% liable for the cop who died of a heart condition during a 3-way with a hooker? "Failed to properly diagnose the heart condition". This is somewhat what i was getting at earlier. It is unreasonable to expect us to catch 100% of everything 100% of the time. So I think it is ridiculous to also hold us liable if a condition goes undetected. By odds alone we are inevitably playing a game of russian roulette

You should look into the background of the doctor's plan a little more...I guess the cardiologist scheduled the guy to have a stress test the next day he saw the pt but the pt wanted to put it off for a week SO he could enjoy his time. Also, I think I remember seeing something about the doctor providing instructions to "avoid strenuous activity" but was dinged for not being specific. All in all, a pretty ridiculous case and I don't think there was any failure of planning or diagnosing on the doctor's part. He just got bent over by the system.

Originally Posted by ensuii

You should look into the background of the doctor's plan a little more...I guess the cardiologist scheduled the guy to have a stress test the next day he saw the pt but the pt wanted to put it off for a week SO he could enjoy his time. Also, I think I remember seeing something about the doctor providing instructions to "avoid strenuous activity" but was dinged for not being specific. All in all, a pretty ridiculous case and I don't think there was any failure of planning or diagnosing on the doctor's part. He just got bent over by the system.

right
I didnt know all the ins and outs of that case, but I was saying that this case was ridiculous. My post was more on the double standards that patients hold.

Originally Posted by SpecterGT260

right
I didnt know all the ins and outs of that case, but I was saying that this case was ridiculous. My post was more on the double standards that patients hold.

You're such a badass. ;-)

I do what I can