- Joined
- Jan 14, 2004
- Messages
- 962
- Reaction score
- 126
It doesn't look like the lack of 24/7 MRI was the issue. It looks like the patient came to the ED with a clear likely dx of epidural hematoma after an ESI, got a stat MRI ordered within 10 min of arriving, but then took 1.5 hrs to have the MRI actually performed. It's not definite from the article, but it doesn't seem like the emergency doc was named. Looks like they went after the pain doc for the injection (settled) and the hospital for the delay in performing the MRI (lost in court).Thoughts:
1. In Texas? Hmm.
2. This sets a precedent. Attention administrators: we need fast MRI access at all hours.
3. See (2) above.
It doesn't look like the lack of 24/7 MRI was the issue. It looks like the patient came to the ED with a clear likely dx of epidural hematoma after an ESI, got a stat MRI ordered within 10 min of arriving, but then took 1.5 hrs to have the MRI actually performed. It's not definite from the article, but it doesn't seem like the emergency doc was named. Looks like they went after the pain doc for the injection (settled) and the hospital for the delay in performing the MRI (lost in court).
EDIT: you said fast access, so yeah, agree that seems to be the problem.
I’d say that this is relatively quick and expedious care. Not sure where this could be done quicker or more efficiently. Certainly no where I work. What a joke.They bold and italicize "1 hour and 37 minutes" like it is a scandalizing shock. I would second that this is reasonably fast.
Another example that law suit cases aren't won based on the merit of the cases.
Evokes the same feeling I get when I walk into an ESI 4 or 5 room, and the first thing I hear is, "I'm very frustrated. I've been here two hours and you're the first doctor I've seen."They bold and italicize "1 hour and 37 minutes" like it is a scandalizing shock. I would second that this is reasonably fast.
Correct. At present, here's how I get an MRI after 5 pm for a true red flag case.
1. Order MRI.
2. Find charge nurse.
3. Charge calls rad tech 5 times.
4. Rad tech calls MRIgal at home.
5. MRI gal calls back after 2 hours and 5 phone calls to argue as to why this isn't needed or covered by protocol, hangs up.
6. Charge tells me about (5). I say: "get her skinny ass in here now".
7. Charge repeats (5).
8. I repeat (6).
9. MRIgal calls radiologist to complain.
10. I call radiologist to complain.
11. Radiologist calls MRIgal to complain.
12. MRIgal takes 2 hours to shower, put on makeup, feed dog, walk dog. Comes in.
13. MRIgal finds me, complains.
14. I complain back.
15. She takes patient, does study.
16. MRI sits unread for hours.
17. I tell charge RN to teleharass radiologist to read the study.
18. Charge RN "thinks about it", decides to take smoke break instead.
19. Charge RN returns from smoke break.
20. Repeat (17) thru (19) until we get a result.
5 hours from door to OR. Quite honestly, that’s not that bad, especially since there was an MRI done in between.
Come to my shop and I’ll spend 5 hours just to find a transfer facility and an available ambulance to get the patient transferred 😂😂 everywhere is full again -_-
I’d say that this is relatively quick and expedious care. Not sure where this could be done quicker or more efficiently. Certainly no where I work. What a joke.
I agree, but the fact that the MRI tech clocked out requiring them to call in a tech to complete the study probably made the jury see it in a different light. Yes, normally it takes a long time to get MRIs. In this case, had that MRI tech just stayed over 20 minutes, the MRI would've been done immediately.
You and I know that, and we also know how eager someone can be to leave when you've dedicated your whole day to others and want some family time, but a jury does not see it that way. The extra time cost this person her ability to walk. That's how they view it.But we both know that there would be no way to get that MRI tech to stay, which then puts us in my 20 step algorithm above.
I wonder how many of the jurors are frequently asked to stay 1-2 hours over the end of their shift - if any of them work at allI agree, but the fact that the MRI tech clocked out requiring them to call in a tech to complete the study probably made the jury see it in a different light. Yes, normally it takes a long time to get MRIs. In this case, had that MRI tech just stayed over 20 minutes, the MRI would've been done immediately.
Oh, I don't disagree. At all.You and I know that, and we also know how eager someone can be to leave when you've dedicated your whole day to others and want some family time, but a jury does not see it that way. The extra time cost this person her ability to walk. That's how they view it.
Glad it looks like the ED doc wasn't named. But the writer seems to imply that the ED doc didn't call the spine surgeon until the MRI resulted? I dunno what her exam looked like, but with her story and symptoms spine should've been called before she even went to the MRI suite. Other than that, the ED doc looks like the most innocent person here, second to the surgeon.
The community ED we rotated at in residency would usually get an MRI done within an hour of ordering it, assuming it wasn't some pan-neuraxis nonsense. It was fantastic.
Seeing all these crazy spine related malpractice reports has made me super paranoid on a occasion. I'll sometimes order imaging and call neuro/ortho at the same time.Why would spine be consulted before the MRI? It would have just delayed things even further
Seeing all these crazy spine related malpractice reports has made me super paranoid on a occasion. I'll sometimes order imaging and call neuro/ortho at the same time.
Agreed. Alerting the surgeon doesn’t do what needs to be done, which is getting an imaging diagnosis. It’s not like the spine surgeon is going to call in the OR staff with your exam findings.Why would spine be consulted before the MRI? It would have just delayed things even further
Louisiana requires medical review panel prior to proceeding to litigation. Does nothing to prevent frivolous suits, even when the medical review panel rules unanimously in your favor…ask me how I know.I really wish nationally we would have tort reform where all states and federal court cases require a panel of docs to review before litigation could proceed. That would eliminate a lot of litigation provided they don't have these guns for hire review cases. Should be random sampling of same specialty docs practicing in that state.
I agree with you. However, it does create a record of you taking the patient seriously and trying to do w/e you can in the constraints of the system you work in.Agreed. Alerting the surgeon doesn’t do what needs to be done, which is getting an imaging diagnosis. It’s not like the spine surgeon is going to call in the OR staff with your exam findings.
It’s like calling a urologist for every testicle pain. I did that once in the community when I was right out of residency and the urologist told me to never call him with a symptom, he wants a diagnosis. Ok cool, makes sense.
These outrageous verdicts damage society in general. They scare doctors in general who then practice defensive medicine and spend gazillions. It may be inappropriate to put a 95 year old demented person on a ventilator but everyone is afraid of a jackpot verdict and they do whatever the family wants.I really wish nationally we would have tort reform where all states and federal court cases require a panel of docs to review before litigation could proceed. That would eliminate a lot of litigation provided they don't have these guns for hire review cases. Should be random sampling of same specialty docs practicing in that state.
I agree but the idea that ANY of the physicians involved had to settle and will need to report this on all future paperwork is a complete clown show.I guess I'm the only one not outraged that a hospital was held accountable for useless administrators coming up with nonsense policies and then failing to actually staff in a way that makes them feasible. This wasn't some subtle presentation that got missed. And it's not like there was some unavoidable delay in care, it's the same garbage staffing and culture to maximize profits that we see everywhere.
And is this really the same hospital that sent the Ebola patient home after he presented with fever and a history of travel to an area with an active Ebola outbreak?
How about a system where every patient gets to either opt in or opt out of auto-indemnification for economic costs related to complications from procedures or malpractice. No jackpot verdicts however, but you know you won't be left destitute as a result of a misdiagnosis or complication. You would think the AHA and professional societies could get behind this.
I guess I'm the only one not outraged that a hospital was held accountable for useless administrators coming up with nonsense policies and then failing to actually staff in a way that makes them feasible. This wasn't some subtle presentation that got missed. And it's not like there was some unavoidable delay in care, it's the same garbage staffing and culture to maximize profits that we see everywhere.
And is this really the same hospital that sent the Ebola patient home after he presented with fever and a history of travel to an area with an active Ebola outbreak?
Yes. But so does ordering a stat study a documenting efforts to make it happen stat. There’s not a right or wrong answer here. I just don’t want to call a spine surgeon with 5 phony “heads up” calls for every real deal. I want that spine surgeon operating, not responding to a bunch of questionable heads up calls. YMMV based on local conditions.I agree with you. However, it does create a record of you taking the patient seriously and trying to do w/e you can in the constraints of the system you work in.
I remember being trained that if you clinically suspect appendicitis that labs/CT doesn't matter and call the surgeon to consult.It’s like calling a urologist for every testicle pain. I did that once in the community when I was right out of residency and the urologist told me to never call him with a symptom, he wants a diagnosis. Ok cool, makes sense.
Also in training they would actually take the appys at night if the trauma surgeon wasn’t busy - whereas I can’t remember the last time an appy went to OR between 1900 and 0700 at my current place. I mean technically if one perforated during that time would that be “wanton and willful negligence”? Because it’s happening several times a weekI remember being trained that if you clinically suspect appendicitis that labs/CT doesn't matter and call the surgeon to consult.
Soon after being an attending, classic appy with fever/elevated WBC. CT prob takes another 2 hrs. Called the surgeon, and he says, "sounds like an appy, call me when the CT comes back"
Word.Bad things happen, to everyone at least once in their life, it can’t always be someone’s fault. It would be nice if the Public ever gave medical providers the benefit of the doubt. This is really upsetting.