Acting Chief Of Neurosurgery: A Case Study

A nurse attending stated “during the morning’s second surgery, he actually dozed off. The nurse took him aside and recommended that he take a break, but he refused and returned to the operation.” The nurse here was in fault in more ways than one. This nurse should never allowed the doctor return back to operate on the patient, he should have been removed from the operating room immediately. The nurse should have

“A decision made by a person (‘P’) after he has reached 18 and when he has capacity to do so, that if – (a) at a later time and in such circumstances as he may specify, a specified treatment is proposed to be carried out or continued by a person providing health care for him, and (b) at that time he lacks capacity to consent to the carrying out or continuation of the treatment, the specified treatment is not to be carried out or

The Perin v. Hayne case involves malpractice in which the plaintiff, Perin sought damages on four theories specific negligence, res ipsa loquitur, breach of express warranty and battery. The surgery was successful at eliminating pain, however as a result the plaintiff suffered vocal cord paralysis. I believe that due care was shown because Dr. Hayne, the defendant, performed the surgery exactly the same way any other physician would under the same condition. Also, informed consent was exercised and there was no way to predict or prevent such occurrence. Dr. Hayne followed the standard of care and did not sway from it. There is no negligence because there was no evidence that the nerve was severed during surgery. The court found that

the care of the patient is better served at another facility that can provide certain services

These plaintiffs (patients) desire admission to the defendant hospitals for the treatment of their illness, and to be treated by their present physician or dentist, without discrimination on the basis of race.

The Supreme Court will also hold that Sampson did not met her burden to raise a fact issue on each element of this theory against a hospital for the acts of an independent contractor emergency room physician as well as resolve a conflict in the courts of appeals holdings regarding its necessary elements. The Supreme Court discarded the doctrine that a hospital has a non-delegable duty to its emergency patients by granting a summary judgment in favor of a hospital due to the posted signs saying that the physicians were independent

I must be aware, as the patient’s advocate, of the choice of each individual patient regarding his or her medical management or, as in this case, the withholding of treatment.

Authorizations to see a specialist to have services provided are the result of a doctor putting

According to me, he says absolutely right in this matter. It is true that they have to accept the substituted judgment and in that act if there is no clear evidence of the patient’s desire then they can include the decision of the close family member in this decision making process. They did not have to the follow the statement given by her roommate, but they just need to follow a simple law that says that somebody close from her family can make a decision behalf of her if she is not able to take decision. He has also given some other patient’s examples that in that case, the decision was made differently. He also has described the vegetable state in

And the fact he deemed it unnecessary to speak to the patient is a huge violation of the doctrine of consent and portrayed him to be an insufficient health leader by not following the guidelines put forth in all hospitals to abide by to ensure it’s best to the patients. His incompliant ways can affect the future of the hospital putting in jeopardy many jobs and lives.

The evidence shows the claimant has a history of a right parietal occipital cerebral vascular accident (CVA) on 4/11/14. The CVA resulted in right

The morning of the surgery, the patient was undergoing a surgical procedure asked if I could explain the procedure to her since I am a registered nurse. She has claimed that she did not fully understand the physician’s explanation when he came to see her. I politely told her that I will page for the physician so he can come and explain the procedure again, but she was not happy and said: “aren’t you a nurse?” So, in order to resolve this dilemma, I had to tell the patient that nurses practice under the state nurse practice act guidelines in accordance with state rules. Therefore, explaining a surgical procedure that a physician will perform is not part of my scope of practice. It is the duty of the physician performing a surgical procedure to obtain an informed consent from the patient, not the nurse. Meaning the patient has fully understood the risk and benefit of the procedure and verbalized understanding to the physician before signing the consent (Westrisk, 2013). The patient seemed to understand and agree that I should call the physician for more clarification about the

The patient requests a more intensive service or test that is deemed to be medically necessary by the provider.

“Hospitals are not only required to care for emergency patients, but they also are required to do so in a timely fashion” (Pozgar, 2010, p. 272). “Hospitals are expected to notify specialty on-call physicians when their particular skills are required in the emergency department. An on-call physician who fails to respond to a request to attend a patient can be liable for injuries suffered by the patient because of his or her failure to respond” (Pozgar, 2010, p. 271). Under the doctrine of Respondeat Superior, hospitals are also liable for the actions of physicians working or on-call in their emergency department.

Upon arrival a patient should have been made aware about a delay therefore he/she would not get inpatient. The appointment itself should not be rushed. A health proffessional should have explained everything in a clear and precise manner giving patient the opportunity to voice any concern or ask any additional questions. In regards to the appointment itself, the