kedlac case study

Case Paper on Kadlec Medical Center v. Lakeview Anesthesia Associates Silence is not always golden. In this case it is truly represented due to the lack of information provided by a prior employer. “Dr. Robert Lee Berry was a practicing anesthesiologist and shareholder in Lakeview Anesthesia Associates, L.L.C.” (https://www.quimbee.com/cases/kadlec-medical-center-v-lakeview-anesthesia-associates) “In March 2001, Berry failed to respond to several pages while on a 24-hour shift at LRMC and was found sleeping in a chair and “appeared to be sedated.” (https://www.quimbee.com/cases/kadlec-medical-center-v-lakeview-anesthesia-associates) There were also some concerns expressed by nursing staff about how Dr. Berry was taking Demerol and not signing off for the medication. What we are coming to understand is Dr. Berry has a truly severe disease known as addiction. The information provided and witnessed by the employers and employees is what helped determine Dr. Berry’s termination. Soon after Dr. Berry’s termination from Lakeview and his LRMC staff privileges were revoked he sought employment from Kadlec Medical Center. “Prior to Dr. Berry’s employment at Kadlec Medical Center the hospital sent a letter to LRMC requesting recommendations and evaluations of Dr. Berry’s skills and abilities.” (https://www.quimbee.com/cases/kadlec-medical-center-v-lakeview-anesthesia-associates) Kadlec also gave LRMC a questionnaire that had specific questions they wanted to have answered. LRMC responded to Kadlec with a very short letter stating only Dr. Berry’s dates of employment with no other information given and the

questionnaire not filled out. Consequently, based on the information provided by LRMC and Dr. Berry’s former colleagues at Lakeview, Kadlec hired him. After a year of working for Kadlec, Dr. Berry was the anesthesiologist for a tubal ligation surgery. “The surgery resulted in a horrific outcome, allegedly due to the physician’s gross negligence and drug impairment during surgery.” (Hofstra, Patricia. The Duty to Disclose The Cost of Silence in Medical Staff Credentialing. Modern Health Magazine. Web. August 2006) The family of the now vegetative patient sued Dr. Berry and Kadlec as his employer. Kadlac settled the case for 7.5 million dollars. Kadlac was not going to allow for all the blame to be put on them and decided that they were going to recover what they had paid out. Kadlec with the help of their insurance company sued lakeview, Lakeview anesthesia Associates and the doctors who had written the letters of reference for the physician. “This litigation resulted in the 8.2 million jury verdict, for which the provider defendants are liable for 4 million.” (Hofstra, Patricia. The Duty to Disclose The Cost of Silence in Medical Staff Credentialing. Modern Health Magazine. Web. August 2006) “The court held that a party does not incur liability every time it casually makes and incorrect statement, but liability was warranted here due to public policy concerns for patient safety. Therefore, Dr. Dennis’s and Dr. Preau’s statements endorsing Dr. Berry just shortly after firing him were affirmatively misleading and violated this duty.” (Leatherbury, Sims, Strama, Tobey. Kadlec v. Lakeview anesthesia Associates: Firth Circuit Finds No Affirmative Duty to Disclose Between Health Care Providers under Louisiana Law. NP.)

So what does this case bring to light? It’s the fact that not disclosing the information about a previous employee who was terminated under incriminating circumstances can and will cause serious consequences. Even though Dr. Berry might have had the education and the know how to do the job well he was not able to do so because of his illness. Had the information been provided that Dr. Berry was terminated for on the job negligence due to substance abuse, which was accessible to him daily, Kadlec along with many other employers would have given it a second thought about hiring Dr. Berry. It is also safe to say that an extensive peer review should have been accomplished. Yes, Lakeview was not clear and did not provide all the information that maybe it should have. Kadlec should have seen that and pursue the issue more and obtain the information that they were truly trying to obtain. “Kadlec highlights the importance of the adherence to establish peer review processes and the use of national reporting systems such as the National Practitioners disclosure between health care providers, including increasing patient’s safety and preventing unsuitable doctors from evading discovery by changes states.” (Leatherbury, Sims, Strama, Tobey. Kadlec v. Lakeview anesthesia Associates: Firth Circuit Finds No Affirmative Duty to Disclose Between Health Care Providers under Louisiana Law. NP.)

Citation
. N.p.. Web. 8 Oct 2013. .
N.p. Web.
N.p. Web.