CONTENTS:
- Perspective: Rabies? Practicing defensive medicine leaves me sleep deprived
- Empty chair defense backfires
- Rapid strep test is sufficient
Perspective: Rabies? Practicing defensive medicine leaves me sleep deprived
Recently I lost a night’s sleep worrying about whether a treatment in which I became a participant might have done more harm than good. Here’s the scenario.
Empty chair defense backfires on defendant urologist
When a male pelvic trauma patient developed problems following a urethral catheterization, the defendant urologist opined that the patients problems may have been caused by prior nurse attempts to catheterize the patient , even though the urologist’s own attempt went smoothly. However, the urologist’s attorney failed to notify the plaintiff attorney of this defense tactic, and the judge ruled that he would declare a mistrial if this opinion were later offered at trial. Despite this, the urologist could not keep his mouth shut on the stand, offered his opinion, and a mistrial was declared. What would have been an easy defense verdict was later settled before a re-trial. Two morals here: (1) a defendant doctor should follow his/her attorney’s – and the judge’s – advice, and (2) a defense attorney needs (apparently in most jurisdictions) to inform the plaintiff attorney of a proposed line of defense… and assure that his/her client comply with instructions from the court. << CLICK HERE >>
Rapid strep test sufficient: FYI
I reviewed an article on MedScape (that I can’t crosslink because a subscription is required). Bottom line: A family physician relying on a negative rapid strep test in his office was found not to have committed malpractice after the teenage patient developed acute rheumatic fever 4 weeks later. The standard of practice no longer demands that a followup culture of a negative rapid strep be done, at least as demonstrated by the results of this one case.