Patient's Husband: A Case Study

The initial problem with Lewis Blackman's case was that lewis was administered inappropriate medication. First he was given a strong dose of opioid pain medication and on top of that prescribed an adult IV painkiller called Toradol. His medication was being increase even though it was not affecting the patient relieve pain. The nurses fail to diagnose the patient's pain and reevaluate him on his pain status. Followed by that Lewis was having trouble breathing, that is one of the first priorities for a nurse. Yet they assume because he had a history of asthma, him having affected breathing was normal. Therefore, his vital signs, pulse oximeter, were compromised the day after surgery from 90 to 85 which is low. The hospital was not concerned

The nurse should have never allowed the doctor to proceed in that state. If she would have stopped him the injuries to Mr. Hicks would not have happened. No doctor should ever be allowed to operate in that state he was in at that time. Not only is it dangerous it in ethically wrong of the doctor to perform such a reckless act.

Hello all, my name is David Jamison, MHA. I am representing Marion General Hospital as the committee chairman of the ethics committee. I am currently reviewing the case involving female patient Margie Whitson. The patient is a 95 year old patient whom wishes to have her pace maker “turned off”, due to her unwillingness to live. The death of her only remaining son was the last event that, that had forced her to contemplate the reason why she still lives. Mrs. Margie Whitson is no stranger to loss. When she was younger, she lost her youngest son to a severe motor vehicle accident that took his life at the early age of 30. She injured herself over 10 years ago, and received a hip fracture. Her most recently bout was

In the Code of Ethics for Nurses provision 4 states “The nurse has authority, accountability, and responsibility for nursing practice; makes decisions; and takes action consistent with the obligation to promote health and to provide optimal care.” This was not done, there was no regard for human life. The patients in the hospital were treated as a burden. A meeting was held where the doctors agreed that

The plaintiff in Ard v. East Jefferson General Hospital, stated on 20 May, she had rang the nurses station to inform the nursing staff that her husband was experiencing symptoms of nausea, pain, and shortness of breathe. After ringing the call button for several times her spouse received his medication. Mrs. Ard noticed that her husband continued to have difficulty breathing and ringing from side to side, the patient spouse rang the nursing station for approximately an hour and twenty-five minutes until the defendant (Ms. Florscheim) enter the room and initiated a code blue, which Mr. Ard didn’t recover. The expert witness testified that the defendant failed to provide the standard of care concerning the decease and should have read the physician’s progress notes stating patient is high risk upon assessment and observation. The defendant testified she checked on the patient but no documentation was noted. The defendant expert witness disagrees with breech of duty, which upon cross-examination the expert witness agrees with the breech of duty. The district judge, upon judgment, the defendant failed to provide the standard of care (Pozgar, 2012, p. 215-216) and award the plaintiff for damages from $50,000 to $150,000 (Pozgar, 2012, p. 242).

As noted, on February 29, 2016, the patient was nonetheless admitted to the UCR hospitalist. This was a senior member of the UCR hospitalist team who knew or should have known all of the policies and procedures for admission, and should never have admitted the patient as an attending to the hospital. In so doing, he was directly and deliberately interfering with the doctor patient relationship.

The State of Tennessee Board of Nursing’s Rules and Regulations of Registered Nurses, Rule # 1000-01-.13-1r states that unprofessional conduct is defined in part by "failing to take appropriate action in safeguarding the patient from incompetent health care practices" (State of Tennessee, 2011). There are a number of arguments in this case study that incompetent health care practices are being performed, from the decision to place a patient on a ventilator for an oxygen saturation of 88%, circumventing the patient’s written and verbal advanced directives, utilizing an unauthorized family member to get consent for

There was additional backup staff present (including a respiratory therapist) that could have been called upon for help, yet they never were. The charge nurse or nurse supervisor could have stepped in at this point to provide additional help. A lack of present nursing staff and support can lead to unfavorable patient outcomes, as is the case with Mr. B. Additionally, the staff on duty could have lacked training regarding protocols or their training could have been out of date.

The nurses did not act as sentries towards the patient or the family. They did not protect the patient’s choice to die in peace, instead they just let the doctor jump in into the situation and try to resuscitate her even though she did not want that.The nurses should have stepped in and asked the frazzled husband what he wants the nurses and doctor to do. Not let the doctor yell at him until he is forced to allow it.

The medicinal experts on staff for the 12 hours that the patient was in painful distress while she was being drowned by the feeding solution, neglected to perceive that she was in trouble until it was past the point of no return. While this is obviously a blatant case of medicinal negligence, not all medical malpractice cases are quite so obvious, and not every single medical procedure with a troublesome result can be viewed as medical malpractice negligence. The essential prerequisite for medical malpractice is that the doctor or other medical expert has breached the acknowledged standard of care for their specialty in their geographic area, and that the breach caused harm to the patient. Doctors, as human beings, commit errors consistently, yet in the event that their mistake does not bring about injury or harm to the patient, there are no grounds for lawful

I could not agree with you more. I also believe that Mrs. Wallace is not receiving the care that is warranted. People trust health care personnel to do what is right, and to assist in the recovery process. In this day and time, more and more cuts are being made in the health care field. I actually wrote about this same subject in my journal this week. The employees are expected to do more with less, and the care is suffering. I don’t believe that administration wants the care to suffer, but their hands are tied as well. A facility cannot remain open if the bills are not being paid, but at the same time, the staff will not idly stand by and allow patients to suffer harm because of the staffing constraints. It is becoming a no-win situation for all of those involved. I am

Physicians swear by the code primum non nocere, Latin words for, “first do no harm” (Pozar, 2014). In the video, the resident physician clearly did not follow protocol when she administered the drugs. The intent was good, however, the risk involved with administering a drug without the patient’s medication history and possibly causing death it too great. This is especially true knowing the patient already had severe reactions to other narcotics (morphine) during a previous hospitalization. Furthermore, the doctor was a resident physician, thus still in training, not the attending physician, so the resident physician lacked the experience needed to make the appropriate calls during that critical situation. The actions taken by the resident physician were unethical, of poor judgment, and violates the Hippocratic Oath.

During the home health observation day, there were several opportunities to observe a variety of patients with varying levels of functioning ability, different illnesses, and different needs and levels of interaction with the nurse. The first patient seen was a seventy-three year old Caucasian female with an ulcer on her right heel. Several weeks prior, she had scratched her left leg and she also had several small wounds on her left leg. The orders were to clean and redress the ulcer. She has a history of end stage renal disease, pneumonia, weakness, diabetes, dialysis, and right hip fracture. Upon entering the home, the patient was found to be sitting in a wheel chair in the living room watching television with her husband close by her side. She greeted the nurse with a smile and began to update her on her current condition. Her heel was “hurting” and she rated her pain an 8 on a scale of 1 to 10. She also had some “swelling” that she could not “get to go away; because, she could not get up and walk. They need to fix my foot so that I can get up and get around.” She told the nurse that she had been to see the doctor “yesterday” and the doctor had given her a written order that she wanted her to see. The order was written for an evaluation for a soft pressure shoe fitting. The nurse read the order to

This can be read as a key ethical question to many healthcare case studies because of the errors and situations that occur. One of the explanations for this occurrence may be the overwhelming workload, chaotic environment and lack of individual attention prescribed to each patient. These issues can cause a disruption to the ethical principle of Beneficence. The principle of Beneficence calls to action the act of helping others and having compassion for the patients. This principle can be threatened when a doctor or caretaker is overworked and unable to effectively manage the series of patients and work they are assigned to take on. I believe that the admitting doctor did not initially catch the error of not calling for the specific drug need because he was more focused on getting Mr. Londborg stable and on the medication to treat his initial and present condition before worrying about the preventative medication. In addition, the doctor was so focused on helping everyone all at once that he was blind to the small details and loose ends that needed to be taken care

As a doctor, to prepare myself to take on this case I would have to process a substantial amount of information and use my best judgment to conceive what the best plan of action regarding this case should be. Reviewing the four key principles in medical ethics: nonmaleficience, beneficence, respect for autonomy, and justice, would prove to be very helpful. After reviewing and consulting with my peers I would most likely conclude that the patient is the one receiving the service and is to be put first above all other factors contributing to the situation.