Patient Safety Case Study

Hospitals are known for providing medical care to patients that are sick or injured. They help in the recovery process by providing treatment specific to the patient’s condition. Each health care professional has a unique role that should be carried out to the highest standard to prevent unwanted mistakes that could prolong their healing or that could potentially harm and do damage to the patient. One of the most important moments that occur in a health care setting; when one must be focused and most concerned about patient safety; is during a surgical operation. During this time the operating room can be full of distractions. It is the responsibility of the health care professionals to work soundly as a team to create an environment that reduces
It was considered a civil case due to the event being of unintentional nature. Lucille Davis along and her husband James Davis were the plaintiffs. The defendants consisted of Colorectal Surgery Associates P.C., Douglas A. Brewer, M.D., Tara L. Hahn, M.D., and Macon Northside Hospital. Lucille Davis sued on the grounds that she suffered from negligence. The doctors were able to provide evidence showing that they could entrust the surgical tech and nurse circulator with providing an accurate count. With that, the jury found negligence on part of the employees. In the end a settlement was reached. Lucille received 8.5 million. Her husband also received 1.5 million in order to resolve the medical malpractice lawsuit. Lucille’s medical expenses were close to $900, 000. The two legal terms I feel represent this situation are Res Ipsa Locquitor and Primum Non
Mistakes do happen and cannot always be avoided, though this type of medical error I believe could have been prevented. One of the obvious reasons this incident occurred was due to an inaccurate count of sponges by the surgical technician. This ultimately falls under the responsibility of the surgical technician and circulating nurse. The doctors can also take some accountability due to it being everyone’s duty of patient safety. Another reason I believe may have affected the outcome was the procedure change from laparoscopic to an open surgery. If the open sigmoidectomy surgery had never been performed the sponge would have never been left inside the patient. Tools and instruments would have been the only things that would have entered the patient’s body through tiny ports. The change in procedure may also have added the sponges to the count and the focus and detail orientation of the scrub tech and circulator may have been altered but still is no excuse. One rule I would implement to make sure this didn’t happen again or at least decrease the chances of it happening again is to do a double count of sensitive materials that are more likely to be left inside a