A 56-year-old man presented to the ED with dizziness.
There were conflicting stories about the last known normal, ranging from the previous day to multiple points that morning.
The patient was roomed but given he had no symptoms on the nurse's exam, he was not made a stroke activation.
Several hours later the ER doctor started his shift, and the patient was immediately made a stroke activation for slurred speech and weakness.
The nurse would later go back and document retroactive neuro exams, which would conflict with the ER doctor's assessment of the last known normal.
The patient survived with moderate residual deficits.
Once the lawsuit was filed, the ER doctor attempted to dodge the process server for several weeks. He ultimately gave in and was served with notice of the lawsuit.
The deposition of the patient revealed numerous inconsistencies. His own wife pointed out multiple discrepancies that nearly sank their own lawsuit from the beginning.
The deposition of the ER doctor and nurse revealed their thought process that day and some questionable practices in the nurse's documentation habits.
Multiple expert witnesses were deposed for both the plaintiff and defense, turning into a high-stakes journal club debating the tPA and thrombectomy literature.
The lawsuit ultimately reached a confidential settlement.
This is truly a fascinating case that will entertain you, educate you, teach you how to defend yourself with effective documentation, and provide you with up to 10 hours of stroke CME credits.
