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

Roma and Clint Underhill had both had a long day. They were the owners of a successful real estate

An experienced nurse Julie Thao was taking care of 16-yeas old Jasmine Gant who was about t give a birth. Thao is accused of making a mistake that had terrible and tragic result on the life of a pregnant teenage, unborn child, Gant’s family, health care, and Thao’s life. Thao mistakenly gave Gant an epidural anesthetic intravenously instead of an IV antibiotic for a strep infection. Within minutes of receiving the epidural IV, Gant suffered seizures and died. Her child, a boy, was delivered by emergency Caesarean section and survived. So what caused this tragedy to happen? According to investigation, Thao improperly removed the epidural bag from a locked storage system without authorization, she did not scan the bar code, which would have told

Treatment without consent - Charlotte, the nurse on duty, had forced James into getting the injections therefore causing him emotional distress. Treating a competent patient who has validly refused treatment could constitute an assault or battery. The legal provisions supporting a competent patients’ right to refuse treatment in Australia can be found in both legislation throughout all the States and common law. The Australian Charter of Healthcare Rights is also a helpful source of guidance as it reinforces the common law position that is based upon the principle of patient autonomy. The High Court of Australia first articulated the principle or refusal of treatment in Marion’s case, stating that a legally competent person has a right “to choose what occurs with respect to his or her own person.” Under the NSW Health Patient Charter, consent in regard to an operation, procedure or treatment is both a specific legal requirement and an accepted part of good medical practice. Medical practitioners are also expected to clearly explain proposed treatment, and adequately inform their patients on significant risks and alternatives associated with the treatment.Failure to do this could result in legal action for assault and battery against a practitioner who performs the procedure. Charlotte made no effort to explain or gain a consent from James.

The case study of Crowe v. Provost, 374 S. W. 2d. 645 (Tenn. 1963), was a highly-anticipated court case for the 1960’s. The following list pertaining to the example of what went wrong and by whom. The first patient appointment opens a file with the patient’s basic information and any allergies including medication(s). This would typically be done with the receptionist. If this was not the doctor’s first time seeing this patient, then the physician should have checked the chart to see if there were any allergies to anything including medication, such as, Penicillin and Cosa-Terrabon. Referring to the Crowe vs. Provost, the child was then rushed back into the doctor’s office with worsening symptoms, the nurse should have listened to the mother. The nurse, could have instructed the mother to take the worsening child to the nearest Emergency Department. The nurse advising the doctor, “That she thought the child was about the same as when the physician saw him earlier in the day” (Flight, M., 2011, page 5-6) was not a good idea. The doctor could have been brought in for an examination of the ailing patient. The receptionist returning from her lunch should not have been a signal for the nurse to leave for any reason with the patient getting worse. Again, the patient and mother should have been instructed to go to the nearest emergency room. The receptionist should not have been left alone with an ailing patient. Mistakenly, the receptionist calling the doctor first and

Facts Plaintiff Nosrat Khajavi, who is an anesthesiologist, was terminated under an oral contract stating for a specified term. This was caused by a dispute over the plaintiff and a ophthalmologist on how the proceeding should be on the specific surgery that happened that happened in the operating room which lead to an bigger argument. The ophthalmologist’s brother was the head of the anesthesia group. Then Feather River Anesthesia

University Hospital is a well known hospital with a level 1 trauma treatment center for the tri-county area of a northwestern state, the hospital enjoys the fact they are known for their promising reputation among healthcare professionals and the public they serve. Jan Adams is an OR supervisor that has been working there for ten years, as a professional she makes surgeons follow protocol as required and enjoys working with trauma patients. One Friday night, which is the busiest day of the week for the trauma department; the unit was notified that a helicopter was on its way with a 42 year old man who had been in a car accident. Shortly after the patient arrived to the trauma center, the resident and other medical staff noted that he was in very bad physical conditions, needed immediate surgery or otherwise he was going to die. The issue was that the on call surgeon had to be present during the surgery and had not yet arrived, but regardless of the matter and protocol they proceeded with medically treating the patient immediately. The concern is that in doing so they violated medical procedures and put the patients safety at risk, this lead to a long list of ethical issues for example, patient well-being, impaired healthcare professional, adherence to professional codes of ethical conduct, adherence to the organization’s mission statement, ethical standards, and values statements, management’s role and responsibility, failure

The definition of malpractice according to Merriam-Webster dictionary is dereliction of professional duty or a failure to exercise an ordinary degree of professional skill or learning by one rendering professional services which results in injury, loss, or damage. The nurse did have a professional duty which including following her medication rights, administering the drug correctly after consent had been obtained, and documenting the events clearly and precisely. There could have possibly been a breach in professional duty regarding the choice of injection site. This is dependent on the time period of which the medication was administered and the evidence and practices at that current

Beneficence compounded by nurse-physician communication created ethical problems in this case. Mainly, Joanna’s assessment of Mrs. Kelly being ignored by the resident physician and the nursing supervisor. Joanna worked within the scope and standards of practice, she assessed, evaluated, and monitored her patient’s condition. She then reported her findings to the resident twice, and also sought nursing support from her shift supervisor. After Joanna’s first call to the resident, and her continued concern she needed to advocate in a proactive manner. Continuing her assessment of Mrs. Kelly to include palpation and auscultation could have offered additional clinical information enabling her to articulate the problem to the resident and nursing supervisor.

The history of the Nurse Anesthetist dates back prior to the Civil War and were considered by many as the pioneers of the practice of anesthesia. As the complexity of administering anesthesia increased, physicians deemed the practice of anesthesia to be equivalent to the practice of medicine. As time progressed, some physicians attempted to have the practice of anesthesia banned from the nursing scope of practice. It was not until a case was brought in front of the California Supreme Court where they ultimately established the legal precedent granting nurse anesthesia its legality. Specifying that nurses can administer anesthesia and that they would be operating under their scope of practice as long as it was done under the guidance of a supervising physician (Hamric, Tracy, & O 'Grady, 2014). That law was federally mandated until 2001, when the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid changed the federal supervision rule of Anesthesiologist and Nurse Anesthetists in order for facility to receive reimbursement of care ("Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists Fact Sheet", 2016). This offered states an “opt-out” rule allowing the unsupervised practice of nurse anesthetists. This change led to conflict in the anesthesia community between physicians and Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists (CRNA) as the debate of a CRNA’s ability to practice autonomously was now the center of attention. With the costs of healthcare rising and the

To do so, I am going to use the fishbone diagram to categorize the causative factors (Potter & Perry, 2008).   For patient characteristics, Mr. B was a 67 year old patient with routine use of oxycodone to treat chronic pain.  Because of his routine use of oxycodone, he may need a different dose to get to a sedated level than other people who are not on any medication.  Next is the task factors, the hospital had a policy which requires that anyone who are treated with moderate sedation or analgesia have to be put on continuous blood pressure, ECG, and pulse oximeter monitoring until the procedure is done and patient is in stable condition.  Mr. B was not being monitored accordingly during the sedation process.  Another task factors is that all staffs must first complete a training module on sedation before performing the task.  Individual staff is a factor too, Nurse J had completed the training module on sedation, he had an ACLS certification as well as experience working as a critical care nurse.  Team factors include communication between staffs; an example would be the LPN not informing Nurse J or Dr. T when the alarm went off the first time, it showed that Mr. B had low oxygen saturation.  Work environment factors included the staffing in the ER, the equipments they had, and the level of experience of the staffs.  According to the scenario, additional staffs were available for back up support and all the equipment needed

Charleston Community Memorial Hospital proved a corporate negligence doctrine in the case (Pozgar, 2013). The court found a jury could reasonably find negligence due to the fact that staff did not test for circulation as often as needed, it was concluded that skilled nurses would have been aware of circulation problems, informing attending staff promptly (Law School Case Briefs,2013). There was no argument that the defendant, the hospital in this case, failed to review physicians work, or require a consultation. A jury found that this failure was within reason to assume a negligent act was performed, or not performed in this case (Law School Case Briefs,2013). A person goes to a hospital and within reason expects the hospital to treat them (Pozgar, 2013). There is a legitimate basis in this case to hold the hospital vicariously responsible for torts of its employed staff (Law School Case Briefs,2013). In Darling v. Charleston Community Memorial Hospital, the jury found negligence by both the doctor and the nursing staff, this was supported with evidence during the trial (Law School Case

The Plaintiffs felt that since the hospital was licensed and accredited that they should be held responsible for their employees and their actions. It states in the regulations that any infraction of the bylaws imposes liability for the injury. At any time if Dr. Alexander had questions or concerns he could have reached out to an expert in this field to consult

Mark volunteered to help with the community arts festival; he was supporting the not-for-profit organization as he had in the past. However, he did not know his good intentions as a volunteer would cost him his job as an assistant manager. The retail store’s phone number was printed in the festival advertising in error and ticket requests overloaded the phone lines, causing loss of business and annoyed the store manager. As a result, Mark was seen as the cause of the problems and terminated.

Ethical principals are the seed of which nursing flourishes from. Many ethical principals were involved and dishonored in this case such as, justice, autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, confidentiality and fidelity (Burkhardt et al., 2014). I believe justice was the main principal involved as the entire ethical predicament was revolved around unjust behavior and treatment of the residents. The residents were treated poorly and given unequal rights as a causation of their illnesses. Autonomy, an essential piece of human rights was also being violated in this ethical dilemma. The residents did not have any choice or independence in their care or how they were being treated. Beneficence and non-maleficence are significant dynamics of this ethical situation, as the health care providers needed to reflect on how they can have the maximum benefit while diminishing possible damage to the residents (Burkhardt et al., 2014). Our actions as nurses should always be beneficent and non maleficent, continuously being kind, compassionate and doing what is in their best interest as well a removing and preventing harm. Confidentiality is a key component of nursing and it was blatantly being violated as the health care