Hillside Focus Care: A Case Study

OFC Montejano made contact with the Hegle at Primary Care Desk B lobby. Where the she gave an omission and stated she had an appointment and because the Johnson was not at her desk she missed it. Further, she claims Dr. Little told her she could get the Tens Unit right away. I did however confirm that Hegle did not have and appointment for the use of the Tens Unit. Hegle was given a verbal warning that this type of behavior will not be tolerated and she could be charged with Disorderly Conduct in the future. Hegle departed VA Controlled property without further

D-This writer met with the patient as he was placed on HOLD to address the status of the IOP. The patient provided this writer a paper that was provided to him with listing of IOP for him to explore. The paper shows scribbles of the patient taking down notes about his attempts of who he called. The patient reports Connecticut Addiction Recovery will call him back within 24-48 hours. The patient was able to schedule an appointment with New Direction for May 20th at 7pm; patient spoke with Dan. This writer commends the patient for all of his efforts; however, the patient needs to schedule something earlier than May 20th. This writer asked the patient about ICRC-Coventry House. According to the patient, he called the contact number and showed proof. The patient reports that ICRC gave him two different number and told him to do a walk-in at 8:30am. This writer shared with the patient about a recent conversation this writer had with ICRC. This writer told the patient

SC received phone call from provider Moravia home health care Sherri Hill RN. Requesting that the SC call the provider to discuss the Pa’s scare plan. SC called the provider and spoke with Sherri Hill. Sherri reported that the Pa call the office on 3/21/2016 and reported that aide/ niece Iysha Gayman did not show up for her evening shift and does not want her to work for him anymore. Sherri reported that she called Iysha to enquire about the why she did not show and informed her that the Pa does not want her to continue to work for him. The Nurse reported that Iysha became upset and used disrespectful language at that time Sherri reportedly end the call with Iysha. According to Sherri a short time after she received another call from Iysha

S: "I got dizzy and lightheaded." Subject stated he was on hi way home to Kansas City when he took a surge energy drink. Pt attend after that he got lighthead and dizzy so he pulled over. Pt stated at that time he started having anxiety problems and hyperventilating and his hands began to cramp. Pt stated he called his mom who called 911. Pt stated he felt better after he claimed down and got his breathing under control. Pt states he rarly drinks caffeine and avoids coffe or any type of energy drink. Pt states his mom gave it to him for the long drive home. Pt denies any current s/s and states "I feel fine now." Pt states, "I will be fine and don't need to

During interview Ms. Stoker was alert, aware of surroundings, and answered all questions appropriately and independently. During the visit Ms. Stoker dry heaved into a garbage bucket, and visited the restroom once. The worker was at the residence for about 2 hours. Initially Ms. Stoker was shaking uncontrollable to the point of shaking the entire bed. At the end of the visit the shaking had stopped and Ms. Stoker was smiling and interaction with worker while talking about DELETEbeing a wife and mother. During visit Ms. Stoker received a call from Alacare Home Health. She informed them she was out of her pain medicine but did not inform them she was out of all medicine. Alacare called the pharmacy and was informed she did

Frankie Tilmon continues to be out of treatment compliance. Frankie has missed his last four appointments, 7/2/15, 7/9/15, 7/16/15, and 7/30/15. Frankie contacted this provider on 7/6 to apologize for missing his appointment on 7/2 and was reminded of his next appointment on 7/9, which he agreed to attend. On 7/15 Frankie contacted this provider to apologize for missing his treatment appointment on 7/9 and agreed to make his appointment the following day, which he failed to appear for. On 7/16 Frankie contacted this provider to again apologize for missing his appointment and wanted to confirm his next scheduled appointment day/time. I told Frankie that his appointment day and time has not changed; it was on Thursdays at 4pm. Frankie told

On 03/11/2016 SC met with Pa in her apartment for a RA visit. Pa 's Agency Model PAS aide was not present while SC was there. The Pa appeared poorly groomed and dressed in dark color clothes. The apartment was dirty and cat litter and feces on the table and floor. All utilities are in working order. The Pa reported numerous hospitalizations between Temple University and Episcopal University. The Pa did know the exact dates of admission and/or discharge. However, the Pa stated that reasons for admission were either asthma exacerbation; COPD and/or fluid around the Lungs. The SC placed call to Temple University Hospital medical records department and inquiries about Pa admission and discharges. The SC was placed on hold for a long time and when the SC did speak with the receptionist she stated that most of the Pa admission was at Episcopal Hospital Temple University and she did not have the time to go over every admission she provided the SC with the medical records department telephone number for Episcopal. The SC thanks her for her time and end call. The dates of ER visits and hospital admissions are as follows: 11/2015, 12/2015, 3/1/2016-3/4/2016, 3/5/2016-3/6/2016; and two ER visits 2/29/2016 and 3/7/2016 at Temple University. SC reviewed Pa’s services and per Pa he is receiving services in the type, scope, amount, frequency and duration as specified in the ISP. But the SC reasons to doubt that the Pa is receiving service according to the ISP. The SC arrived at the Pa’s

D-Met with the patient to address a fax from DCF request of the patient records. The patient immediately said, " Don't send this shit. I cannot stand that worker.....I was in court the other day and I am tired of this and this worker always in my business." The writer explained to the patient that should he continue to refuse to sign an ROI, it may hurt his reunification with his son as the patient detailed to this writer about how DCF got involved in his life ( According to the patient, he was intoxicated when visiting his son and a case was called against him and the child's mother). The patient made it clear to the writer that he has no desires to signed an ROI for DCF and for the clinic to ignore DCF request.

Contrary to the alleged, Dr. Brock refuted the claim, defending that he never established a doctor-patient relationship with Anita, which relieves him of liability. In order to validate his refute, Dr. Brock provided four factual elements that were supported by his counterparts; Dr. Whitfield and Dr. Ketcham. The four elements that were presented in the affidavit included: (1) That there has never been a doctor-patient relationship between Dr. Brock and Anita Oliver, (2) Dr. Brock has never seen or talked to Anita or Cathy Oliver, (3) Dr. Brock was not employed, engaged or requested to serve as a consultant to treat Anita, (4) and Dr. Brock was not employed or engaged to consult with doctors treating Anita, concerning complaints or medical problems. In order to support Dr. Brock’s refute, Dr. Whitfield and Dr. Ketcham provided affidavit’s as

M was taking a look at his leg that was injured but seemed to be healing. All was thought to be well until one office visit the doctor went across the hall to check on another patient who seemed to have an infected leg. The doctor left the door open where confidentiality here was obviously not being taking into consideration for the patient he was seeing as well as others who were able to hear them. Since the door was open, his parents noticed that he did not change his gloves while entering that other room and came back to check on their son with no gloves on. Dr. M was concerned about Jacobs leg and told him to come back the following week while treating it with antibiotics. The following week he comes back only to see that he has developed osteomyelitis. This was the same infection that the other patient developed while under the care of his supervision. Jacobs delay in his recover cost him the opportunity to play football and a college scholarship. Jacobs’s parents then resorted to suing Dr. M because of his negligence and lack of medical

This case is extremely relevant to what is known as the four D’s of negligence; duty, dereliction, direct cause and damages. Duty is when a doctor and a patient have formed a relationship and said doctor has taken on the responsibility of taking care of the patient. Dereliction or failure to perform a duty, there must be some kind of proof that the doctor somehow neglected the doctor neglected the patient. Direct cause, there must be some kind of proof that what happened to the patient was a direct cause of how the doctor conducted himself or his failure to act which resulted in injury. Damages a patient must prove that harm was incurred by the direct result of the physicians actions.

Dr. Holt was using Dr. Willis Stone’s rubber signature stamp to submit his own medical entries. Dr. Stone did not know that this was happing and did not countersign any of the entries. Dr. Holt is not a certified doctor, yet and is therefore not allowed to submit them without a countersign, according to the CMS Interpretive Guidelines for Hospitals (482.24(c)(1)(I)). Dr. Holt was also committing forgery in the first degree.

The patient self-admits that she was not always compliant with her appointments due to changes to her work schedule since the month of December of 2016, but shared this information with her counselor. The patient is requesting to be reassigned to another counselor as she reports of not having a positive rapport with Cherron. Cherron was advised based on the patient complaint that it will be addressed with the Clinical Director based on her request to be

The patient was placed on HOLD to see the writer to address his non-compliance with treatment. The patient was reminded about his Step 3 of the patient engagement. According to the patient as the writer reviewed the patient case history of his no show for counseling, group attendance, and continuously AWOL, the patient only response was, " I, know." The writer then inquired of the patient efforts to engage in mental health services through ICRC. The patient admits that he haven't done the intake when the deadline was extended for the third time. The writer discussed with the patient about the risk of facing an intent to discharge due to his non-compliance and addressed alternatives such as suboxone and transferring to a clinic in Massachusetts to accommodate the work location. The patient declines the writer's suggestion as he wants to remain with HCRC-Hartford due to the positive treatment and said. " You guys really care....I do not want to be discharge.....I, mean what is the process of the intent of discharge?" The writer explained to the patient about the appeal process as his record will be reviewed by the Practice Manager to determine as to whether or not to forward with the discharge or the discharge to be overturn.

On 6/16/15, PACT team received a voice mail message from person’s served sister letting PACT know that, “person served was not feeling well yesterday and having breathing problems. I took her to PCP yesterday and he gave her an EKG and sent her to the ER.” On same day, PACT staff made attempts to contact individual’s sister to obtain more information, but they were failed. Staff had no information as to the whereabouts of person served i.e. what hospital she was in. Attempts were also made on 6/17/15, to contact the primary care physician, Dr. Sherer, at his office, but the office was closed and no information could be obtained. Person’s served sister left another message on 6/18/15 stating person served was at Hackensack University Medical