Medical Malpractice

Would this constitute medical malpractice?

This is a three part question: 1. Would a surgeon ordering physical therapy of a damaged limb before he/she knew the extent of the injury constitute medical malpractice? 2. Once a surgeon became aware of the seriousness of an injury would their continued ordering of physical therapy to that limb (which they knew could worsen the condition) constitute medical malpractice? 3. Would a surgeon's delaying corrective surgery by almost a year which could risk loss of use of the limb be considered medical malpractice? The injuries suggested here were the result of a traumatic accident in May. Initial x-rays showed only fractures of the shoulder after the (dislocated) shoulder had been "relocated". These x-rays were used as a basis for the ordering of p.t. Three months later, after extensive p.t was ordered, an MRI was ordered. The total results of the MRI were not revealed by the surgeon. The surgeon delayed addressing the extensive shoulder injury until weeks before his office stopped accepting my insurance. Eight months after the initial injury after a surgeon could be found that would address the injury the new surgeon shared that the rotator cuff was completely torn, the shoulder muscle was not attached and and a thread of a torn/tearing tendon is all that is attached to the upper arm. We were informed that surgery is imperative or risk permanent loss of use of the arm. Surgery is scheduled within the week.

Public Comments

1. Malpractice is defined as improper or negligent care of a patient resulting in injury, damage, or loss. In order to have a legal case, you have to show that you suffered a significant injury resulting permanent disability or death. It's really difficult to answer your questions without more specific details. I'm sorry for the length but I couldn't figure out any other way to address your questions. When you sick/injured, the first thing the doctor does is examine you. The findings of the exam are used to formulate a hypothesis of what the problem is. Based on that hypothesis, the doctor orders the least invasive, least risky, and least complicated treatment. If this treatment doesn't work, the doctor sends you for the next level of treatment or additional diagnostic testing. Sometimes the success or failure of a particular treatment is diagnostic in and of itself. For example, if you go to the doctor and say, I have knee pain, you will most likely be given and ace bandage and an anti-inflammatory. If that doesn't work, you would then be referred for physical therapy. If that didn't work, you would be sent for an MRI and possibly on to a specialist. 1. If you see a doctor, he examines you, and decides a course of physical therapy is appropriate based on your symptoms, no, that isn't malpractice. 2. If a surgeon knows that you have an injury and believes that physical therapy would make your condition worse and sends you anyway, then yes, that would be malpractice. If a surgeon knows that you have an injury and believes that physical therapy may be helpful, then no, that isn't malpractice. For it to be malpractice, the doctor has to know that physical therapy absolutely would not help the injury and would in fact make it worse. My experience is that a physical therapist will not do physical therapy when it is obvious that physical therapy is making or will make a problem worse. If you were given physical therapy when it was clear that physical therapy would make the problem worse, then both your physical therapist and doctor would have committed medical malpractice. 3. If a surgeon knew that delaying surgery would cause you to lose the use of your limb and delayed it anyways, then yes, that would be malpractice. If a surgeon believed that an injury would improve over time, even if there was a risk it would get worse, and delayed surgery, no, that would not be malpractice. Taking a risk is not malpractice... If you go to a doctor with a headache, there is a risk that it is due to a brain tumor. You might be given tylenol and sent home to take a nap. If that doesn't help, then the doctor will most likely give you a lecture about exercise, diet, sleep, stress, etc. If that doesn't help, you might get evaluated for migraines and give a new med. If that doesn't help, then you might be sent for an MRI and possibly on to a neurologist. Trying other therapies and not sending you for an immediate MRI, even though there is a risk that you could have a very serious and life threatening problem, is not malpractice. It sounds like you have had some awful experiences with a doctor or doctors. I encourage you to contact the doctor, hospital, and state medical board know that you feel you weren't treated appropriately. I hope that question number three means that while you almost lost risk of your limb, you ultimately maintained use and are back to normal. Best wishes. Part II: If the x-ray only showed fractures after being "relocated", then no, sending you for PT is not unreasonable. You tried PT, it didn't work, so the surgeon went to look for other problems. I don't know why your surgeon didn't tell you what the results of the MRI were. That's something you really need to ask him about. I usually requrest copies of test results, labwork, and studies because what I think is important and what the doctor thinks is important is not always the same. I'm not sure what you mean by "delayed addressing the injury"... Does that mean you had the MRI but had to wait several weeks until your appointment? When you went back to see the first surgeon, after the MRI, what did he say was wrong? I'm not a doctor or a lawyer and without knowing very specifically what went on, it's really hard to give you a good answer. Talk to the surgeon you have now, s/he is probably in the best position to tell you what is and is not reasonable care given your injury. If you are considering legal action, unless your arm is permanently damaged to the extent that it causes significant disablitiy, you will most likely have a very difficult time finding a lawyer to try your case.