Monday, December 04, 2006

My Second Lawsuit

My second lawsuit involved a patient I treated only a couple of weeks after the first, so of course both notices were served to me during the same month, nearly two years later. This made me wonder if I was going to keep getting sued over and over again, and if I was even going to even be able to continue to practice as a physician at all. This suit, however, I was expecting.

I felt particularly bad about this case, and I still do. I consider this disposition to be the worst mistake that I have ever made as a physician. Perhaps she would have died anyway...many of my patients have died even when I did everything "right." But I will always know that I didn't give her the best opportunity to survive because of my errors in judgement. I sent a woman home and she came back two hours later with CPR in progress. I got her heartbeat back, but it was too late.

I recall we were exceptionally busy that night, and she seemed at the time to be the most stable of all my patients. I was supervising an inexperienced Anesthesia intern who barely spoke English, and he was overwhelmed with his four rooms. Meanwhile, I also had an unstable patient with DKA, a hospital employee's family member with septic shock (who later died), an elderly patient with rapid atrial fibrillation, a patient with a cerebral hemorrhage, and a couple of backboarded patients in the shock/trauma rooms, along with a handful of other tenuous patients that were my responsibility as soon as I came on shift. It was a dangerous situation. I asked another faculty from the "minor side" of the ER to keep an eye on my intern while my second-year resident and I ran around putting out fires. Then I turned my attention to Mrs. Johnson.

Almost fifty years old, she presented with a ten year history of intermittent chest tightness, palpitations, and shortness of breath which had increased over the past couple of days. She carried a diagnosis of mitral valve prolapse which had been diagnosed by echocardiogram, and she had undergone two diagnostic heart catheterizations, both of which were entirely normal. The most recent cath was 6 months prior to our meeting. Review of her previous records confirmed all of this information, as well as a few similar presentations to the ED. "Just another anxious MVPer with chest pain," I must have thought. "Good thing she's already been worked up."

Her ECG revealed frequent and multifocal PVCs. Happily, but perhaps unfortunately, both her PVCs and her symptoms immediately resolved after a single dose of IV metoprolol. She was sweating a bit, but so was everyone else in the trauma rooms (we kept them at 80 degrees, by decree of the trauma surgeons). Her electrolytes were normal, but for some reason that I still can't justify to myself I didn't order cardiac enzymes. A certain Cardiologist I know would have been proud of me, I suppose.

I did discuss with her the possibility of admitting her for observation, but I didn't really push for it. She felt so much better that she wanted to go home. I didn't rush her out, and in fact I probably spent more time with her than I spent with some of my other patients who seemed to be much sicker. It's more difficult to discharge a "borderline sick" patient from the ER than it is to admit them, after all. I ultimately performed three serial ECGs, and I spent a lot of time (mis)calculating her risk. I cautioned her to return if her symptoms worsened, and I prescribed a beta blocker.

The rest of the story:

She reportedly developed chest pain on the way home but didn't return as advised. Her husband found her slumped over in the chair not long after they got home, and although her resuscitation was initially successful, she never left the hospital. I still had four hours left in my shift after she finally went up to the ICU, and I probably saw several more patients...but I don't remember any of them. I was stunned, my confidence shattered. When her husband, who was gathered in the hallway with some friends or family, pointed at me from across the ER and yelled out "That's the guy who sent her home!" I wanted to crawl into a hole. I met with him privately and apologized to him, but there really wasn't much that I could say. I'm so sorry. I made a mistake. She was feeling better, and I thought she was going to be OK.

Her autopsy ultimately revealed a nearly occluding lesion in the left main coronary artery, interestingly without evidence of myocardial infarction. The cardiac enzymes I neglected to obtain on her first visit were negative even after her resuscitation. But her prolonged down time and delayed return of circulation had left her with an anoxic brain injury, and so her life support was eventually withdrawn. Her husband filed suit against me, as I expected, but he later dropped it for some unexplained reason. That was definitely a huge surprise. I would have had a difficult time defending myself in this one, but once again, I never even had to give a deposition. Maybe my apology helped, I don't know.

This case, more than any other, taught me the difference between the EM physician's and the Internist's approach to emergency patients. I mistakenly evaluated this patient from the perspective of the Internist or Cardiologist rather than that of the emergency physician. In a nutshell, I think it comes down to where we draw the line of acceptable risk. Other specialists may be comfortable with a 1/1000 or even a 1/100 risk of a bad outcome. In the ER, we cannot afford to be. Until I learned this lesson, I really didn't understand the difference in approach. My overconfidence in her relatively recent and previously unrevealing cardiac workup and my resulting misinterpretation of the significance of her warning arrhythmia were fatal errors that I haven't repeated since (as far as I know).

I can only pray that she rests in peace.

Labels:

16 Comments:

Blogger ShadowFalcon said...

Doctors are under extreme pressure and they can't see into the future. if we sued every doctor everytime they might have missed something, we'd have no doctors left and hospitals full of people who are perfectly well.

12/04/2006 05:16:00 AM  
Blogger Dex said...

I very recently had a similar situation. I am a rotating intern covering a surgical service. One of my general surgery attendings routinely operates on very sick patients. R.R. was very sick with recurrent acute cholecystitis and a history of being 5 years s/p double mastectomy for breast cancer and had brittle diabetes. Mr. R. was an active member of the community and a member of the hospital board. From 25 years of involvement in the hospital he had some knowledge of medicine, and he would routinely barge into the nursing station demanding this work-up, that consult, and the other expensive, time-consuming radiology study. They all, including an extensive cardiac work up along with innumerable ekg's and serial enzymes. 2 weeks after admission the patient finally underwent surgery. Everyone cheered and quietly disengaged themselves, leaving me and another intern to mop up the leftovers and discharge the patient post haste. Mr.T. finally relented after several days of continual reassurance by myself and the team as to Mrs. T.'s recovery.

On a fateful Friday I rounded on the patient with only a preoccupied 2nd year supervising, as both senior residents and the attending were elbows deep in emergency surgeries. The patient was complaining of mild chest pain, and I could see she was a little out of breath. We dismissed these as chronic, for the patient had had thorough workups for both issues. Mr. T., however, demanded a pulmonary consult. I reviewed the 2-day old CXR with him, and I excitedly pointed out the mild cephalization, and Mr.T. pointed out an obvious effusion we had previously dismissed as sympathetic with atelectasis. He suggested sligtly increasing the lasix, and getting a cardiology clearance. The day was a-wastin', and I quickly put in for an EKG while paging the cardiologist.

The EKG and the cardiologist arrived at the same time, and we grudgingly admitted the obvious display of a-fib with RVR, and we reluctantly got yet another set of enzymes. CHIEF RESIDENT said to my co-intern, "where you see defeat, I see opportunity."

We brought up the idea of a transfer to medicine under the cardiologist's service, but Mr.T. refused. We were astonished, but went about transferring the patient to our telemetry unit. I went home, confident this was another false alarm. 2 days later I returned, grateful to find the patient had been transferred to the cardiologist's service. My joy curdled when I saw the patient. In the MICU. Intubated. Transmural post-op MI. Mitral valve rupture. Shit.

Mr. T. naturally wanted heads to roll, and settled his sights on CHIEF RESIDENT, and curiously, on my co-intern. Seems my co-intern, an actual surgical intern, and a damn good one, had lost it the night previously and had rudely dismissed all of Mr.T.'s endless criticisms and complaints, saying she was fine and would be discharged the following morning at the earliest opportunity. Strangely, Mr. T. had developed an inexplicable affection for me, going so far as to write a letter of recommendation for me to the head of the EM department through his innumerable back channels. He told me my residency spot next year was a done deal. Not only was it in the same breath as saying my co-intern would be sacked after his meeting with the chair of surgery, but I hadn't even interviewed yet.

The whole thing is extremely weird and terrifying to me. My career depends on the whims of a fickle god-father like this? Yeesh.

-dex

12/04/2006 07:01:00 PM  
Blogger A Bohemian Road Nurse said...

Please don't beat yourself up anymore. Few people realize the terrible pressures and responsibilities of ER docs.

12/04/2006 09:13:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Unfortunate circumstances, but it is likely that the ultimate outcome would have been the same whether she was admitted or not.

Even if serial EKGs did reveal an STEMI and she was sent for primary PCI, as soon as they engaged and injected contrast she probably would have gone into VF.
Not a fun code in the cath lab...been there, done that.

CardioNP

12/04/2006 11:21:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wait a minute, she had a normal cath 6 months previously. How could that be your fault unless she died of something else such as a pulmonary embolus, aortic dissection, tension PTX, etc...?

The differential diagnosis for acute chest pain is a long long list. As Emergency Medicine physicians, our job is to recognize the life threatening ones. She had a normal cath 6 months earlier and the time before that. My friend, sounds like you adhered to the standard of care to me. We can only work with the information we have. Critical coronary stenosis had already been ruled out by 2 normal caths. How were you to know that the cardiologists misinterpreted the angiograms.

If I was presented with such a patient, I would've done a spiral CT to look for dissections, PE, etc...With the recent 64 slice CT scanners, I've been doing quadruple rule outs routinely (PE, CAD, Dissection, Boerhaave's with a li'l gastrograffin). When was the last time you saw an interventional radiologist performing a pulmonary angiogram? Not since the days of residency for me...and that was many moons ago. CTa's are the gold standard these days.

Your EM Colleague

12/05/2006 05:12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Other specialists may be comfortable with a 1/1000 or even a 1/100 risk of a bad outcome. In the ER, we cannot afford to be."

Please do tell how the standard of care is different between specialties.

PS: A suit againstyou with a patient that had two negative caths (one within 6 months) would have gone nowhere. Ever think that the JD scumbags could not find a hack cardiologist to back them up?

12/05/2006 06:19:00 PM  
Blogger Long Island Nurse said...

suggestion: put a link as a new post, back to the continuation of your story.

if I hadn't clicked around by chance, i never wouldn't known you continued the story, it didn't show up as a "new" post via the blog reader i'm using.

12/05/2006 06:19:00 PM  
Anonymous scalpel said...

This was before spiral CTs were being used to diagnose PE. Around here, they were just starting to be done in 1998-9 and not common until 2000 or later. No d-dimers either. I suppose I could have done a V/Q, but I don't recall the thought occurring to me.

Nowadays, I typically order 1-2 spiral CTs per night. Your points are well taken, but my personal standard of care is to not send people home to die. Since then, I haven't (as far as I know).

12/05/2006 06:27:00 PM  
Anonymous scalpel said...

I don't think the standard of care is different, but the risks are different. If a patient who you've cathed comes in to your office for recurrent chest pain, you might order an exercise stress test next week and be perfectly within your standard of care. I don't know, I'm not a Cardiologist.

If they come into the ER, however, we are probably going to want to admit them for observation, so we will call you. Even if you refuse to admit them, I think your risk is still lower than ours if they go home and die. You weren't there, after all. We were.

Our standard of care (I believe) would be to ask you to personally come to the ER to evaluate them, then you can discharge them if you like. Or we can find another doctor to admit them instead. You might be able to convince some of us to come up with a different plan, depending on how worried and risk-averse we are.

But it's ultimately cheaper to admit 1000 such patients than to pay for one lawsuit. So why fight it?

12/05/2006 07:13:00 PM  
Anonymous scalpel said...

Sorry: my 6:27 comment was in response to the 5:12 Anon EM Colleague, and my 7:13 comment was in response to the 6:19 Anon comment.

And Long Island Nurse, thanks for the tip. Done!

12/05/2006 07:15:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

scalpel:
I know this is a statement of the obvious but it is called using your clinical expertise. You state on another of your threads about some ER docs admitting every 25 yr old female with chostrocondritis. I've seen it happen. I've yet to see one of these people have CAD. One of the hospital's I work at no longer has neurology coverage because all of the neurologist recinded their privledges after being called on every single dizziness that could be, possibly, sort of, maybe, a TIA on the dark side of the moon. Now the ER docs are stuck transferring real neuro patients to the university and begging the hospitalists to admit the kinda, sort of, neuro patients without neuro coverage. Think about the loss of time. Is the best for the patient? Very simply you are paid for your expertise. If you (or your associates) are admitting every 25 yr old with chostrocondritis than the hospital you work at is getting ripped off. They can hire a midlevel provider to do that job, no ER attending is needed fo that level of decision making. Before I end let me emphasize that I have been sued (more than once). It is the nature of the business we work in. In most cases getting sued has nothing to do with competence. Frankly getting sued has very minimally changed my practice style. One day after the present system has collapsed we will all be working for the US equivalent of NHS and getting sued will no longer be an issue. We will be dealing with healthcare rationing at that time.

12/06/2006 09:29:00 AM  
Anonymous scalpel said...

"If you (or your associates) are admitting every 25 yr old with chostrocondritis than the hospital you work at is getting ripped off. They can hire a midlevel provider to do that job, no ER attending is needed fo that level of decision making."

The sticking point is the 25 year old with an aortic aneurysm, PE, congenital cardiac abnormality, pancreatitis, cholecystitis, pneumothorax, VT from cocaine use, etc. I've seen examples of all of those, and you can't just tell them to come in when a midlevel provider is on duty.

Midlevel providers are not particularly helpful in the ER in my experience. There always has to be someone supervising them anyway, and I have to see the patient regardless.

Getting sued has not changed my practice style as much as sending someone home who soon died because I was overconfident in statistics did. Death is my enemy, disability his accomplice. Lawyers are just irritating gnats.

My hospital has never asked me to admit fewer patients or given me a cookie for doing so. They are making plenty of money, and they make money off the BS admissions just as much as they do with the mandatory ones.

I'm a reasonable person, and reasonable people can usually come to an acceptable agreement about a contested disposition.

12/06/2006 03:59:00 PM  
Blogger Charity Doc said...

Hey Scalp,

Good luck in trying to get a hospitalist or internist to admit a chest painer who had a negative cath 6 months earlier. That hospitalist/internist would've asked for a spiral CT or at the least a V/Q scan, and if those are negative he would've declined admission and tell you to send the patient home...And she would've died anyway.

Your only way out of this, if your clinical suspicion was high that the cardiologist(s) f'ed up the previous 2 cath, is to keep her in the ED or admit her to your observation unit for serial enzymes, and then discharge her if the enzymes are normal or get a stress test on her in the morning. My group successfully fought tooth and nail for an observation unit 3 years ago and I fill it up on a nightly basis. Use it or lose it once you get it is the mantra. One sore note with the CDU (Clinical Decision Unit) as they are called these days is that the cardiologists aren't so accomodating during the weekends to come in and read the stress test in the morning, so I end up sending low risks chest pains home after 3 negative sets of enzymes and order a Monday morning stress test.

12/06/2006 09:49:00 PM  
Blogger scalpel said...

I'm pretty convincing if I feel strongly about something. In this case, I was just plain wrong. I never even called her PCP.

I did get a nice handwritten letter from the Vice President of Clinical Affairs expressing his support and trying to cheer me up about the situation. That meant a lot to me.

12/07/2006 11:34:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I do not envy the role of an ER physician. Given the volume of patients to see, the 1/100 or 1/1000 chance of a rare event will eventually come to pass.

From a cardiology perspective, your case is a very difficult one, limited by current technology. I doubt that the angiograms were misinterpreted by the cardiologists. She likely had a freak event (rare) - plaque rupture followed by thrombosis in the most unfortunate place (left main). This usually occurs in mild, nonobstructive vulnerable plaques that cannot easily be detected of angiography (cath 6 months ago) and are often read as normal or luminal irregularities. This is usually low risk unless the plaque ruptures.

We can't predict plaque rupture yet.

Until we can, I tend to admit anything an ER doc wants to our chest pain observation unit.

And I disagree with the prior comment of cardiologists not being accomodating - many of us provide 24/7 cath coverage, 7 days a week stress testing/consultation, are available at any time, and will admit any chest pain for the above reasons.

These are hard decisions and require a team effort with all involved.

12/24/2006 09:45:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In your mind did you really see her as a drug seeker or someone with a psyhiatric condition?

8/06/2008 07:20:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home