3-2 Final Project Milestone One: Malpractice Case

Malpractice Case
Name
Institutional Affiliation

Medical Malpractice
One of the famous cases involving medical malpractice is the case of Iturralde V Hilo Medical Center USA. The plaintiff, Iturralde, had complained of weakness in his legs that had led to several falls. He went to Hilo Medical Center USA in January 2001 for examination. On January 24, 2001, Dr. Ricketson examined him and diagnosed him with degenerative spondylolisthesis. The condition necessitated the plaintiff to undergo a spinal fusion surgery that involved implanting of two titanium rods into his spine. The surgery was to take place on January 29, 2001. Since the hospital did not have the rods, it contacted Medtronic to deliver the rods together with the other necessary tools for the surgery. However, when the package arrived, the hospital staff did not check to confirm whether everything was provided as requested even though this was a requirement according to HMC’s policies. When the day of the surgery came, they noticed the missing rods and asked Dr. Ricketson to wait until they were available to continue with the surgery, but he declined. Instead of the required rods, he improvised a shaft from a stainless steel screwdriver and implanted the same into the plaintiff’s spine. No one informed the plaintiff about this and days later the shaft snapped hurting him. This led to other surgeries, and he passed on two years after the incidence. A nurse informed a lawyer about the day’s incidence and the family decided to sew.

The court awarded the plaintiff 5.6 Dollars.
Four elements make up a medical malpractice case. One of the elements that the plaintiff has to prove to win a case is that a physician owed him or her a professional duty (Bal, 2009). The other element is that the physician breached the said duty. The third element is causation, which means that due to the breach of duty the plaintiff suffered loss. The fourth element is the proof of the resulting damages. In the case, Dr. Ricketson owed a professional duty to act according to the standard of care. He breached the duty by failing to act according to the standard expected when he compromised the care given to the plaintiff. There was causation that can be proved by introducing the ‘But For’ test. The plaintiff’s condition would not have worsened but for the negligence by Dr. Ricketson. Due to the negligence, the plaintiff had to undergo other multiple surgeries before dying.
Different scenarios make up medical malpractice. For example, in some cases, the doctor fails to improve the condition of the patient and creates more harm (Bovbjerg, 1975). In this case, the care given by the doctor deviated from the accepted standards of practice. Under the doctrine of Respondeat Superior, the hospital was also liable.
In the United States, medical malpractice comes into play when the care provided falls below the accepted standards and causes injury (Morreim, 1987). The standard of care, according to the laws, is examined by considering how another physician of the same professional capacity would act in the same situation (Taragin, Willett, Wilczek, Trout & Carson, 1992). It is obvious that physicians with the same qualifications as Dr. Ricketson would have acted differently because even the nurses were against his actions.
Had the plaintiff been from a different background, the events would have turned out differently. For example, Nurse Janelle Feldmeyer would have informed the plaintiff about the events if he understood English. This could have probably contained the situation as changes could have been made before the shaft snapped causing more damage.
The jury found different parties liable. For example, Dr. Ricketson was guilty because he acted in a way that was not expected of a doctor with his qualifications. Medtronic was also guilty because it failed to deliver the products as ordered. Had it provided the tools requested, the situation would have turned out differently. HMC was guilty because it should not have employed Dr. Ricketson because the hospital officials were aware of his past shortcomings. The hospital should employ people who will handle their duties effectively, and Dr. Ricketson had shown that he could not be trusted as he had been sued seven times previously (Idemoto, 2007).

References
Bal, B. S. (2009). An introduction to medical malpractice in the United States. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 467(2), 339-347.
Bovbjerg, R. (1975). The medical malpractice standard of care: HMOs and customary practice. Duke Lj, 1375.
Idemoto, S. K. (2007). Medical Malpractice in Hawai’i: Tort Crisis or Crisis of Medical Errors. U. Haw. L. Rev., 30, 167.
Morreim, E. H. (1987). Cost containment and the standard of medical care. Cal. L. Rev., 75, 1719.
Taragin, M. I., Willett, L. R., Wilczek, A. P., Trout, R., & Carson, J. L. (1992). The influence of standard of care and severity of injury on the resolution of medical malpractice claims. Annals of Internal Medicine, 117(9), 780-784.