Malpractice or negligence?

[Mattmaine1991]

I was rushed to the hospital by ambulance due to a laceration on my right palm. They had to get a tourniquet to control the bleeding. After getting up the hospital they undid the tourniquet and saw the bleeding. The doctor said I don't know how to do this, and called a hand surgeon. In the mean time he has xrays ordered on my hand. Then we came back to the room and the doctor said that the hand surgeon will be in later and he said to stitch my hand up with out looking at why I am bleeding the way I am. They said if it wouldn't stop that I would go into emergency surgery. But they stitched me up kept the tourniquet on and lifted my hand over my head for a hour or more. Then hand surgeon came in and diagnosed me in like 30 seconds. 6 tendons, and 4 nerves. Didn't care to find out why I was bleeding like that. And kicked me out cause I didn't have $30,000 to hand him for surgery.
Was going to another hospital and went into shock and was driven the rest of the way by ambulance. They to couldn't believe I was kicked out in the shape I was in. Yet alone offered medical transport. I was given a surgery date and the doctor said that the other hospital had no clue what was real diagnosis was. My new doctor diagnosed me with 4 tendons, and 2 nerves. While in surgery he also found out why I was bleeding like that. I also had a completely severed artery.

Under the emergency medical and treatment labor act they did not follow protocol , is this correct?
They should of some more test to see why I was bleeding the way I was and and treated me.
And the part for dumping they didn't follow as well? Any hospital that receives medicate fundings are not allowed to dump until they are treated properly?

 

[quincy]

I was rushed to the hospital by ambulance due to a laceration on my right palm. They had to get a tourniquet to control the bleeding. After getting up the hospital they undid the tourniquet and saw the bleeding. The doctor said I don't know how to do this, and called a hand surgeon. In the mean time he has xrays ordered on my hand. Then we came back to the room and the doctor said that the hand surgeon will be in later and he said to stitch my hand up with out looking at why I am bleeding the way I am. They said if it wouldn't stop that I would go into emergency surgery. But they stitched me up kept the tourniquet on and lifted my hand over my head for a hour or more. Then hand surgeon came in and diagnosed me in like 30 seconds. 6 tendons, and 4 nerves. Didn't care to find out why I was bleeding like that. And kicked me out cause I didn't have $30,000 to hand him for surgery.
Was going to another hospital and went into shock and was driven the rest of the way by ambulance. They to couldn't believe I was kicked out in the shape I was in. Yet alone offered medical transport. I was given a surgery date and the doctor said that the other hospital had no clue what was real diagnosis was. My new doctor diagnosed me with 4 tendons, and 2 nerves. While in surgery he also found out why I was bleeding like that. I also had a completely severed artery.

Under the emergency medical and treatment labor act they did not follow protocol , is this correct?
They should of some more test to see why I was bleeding the way I was and and treated me.
And the part for dumping they didn't follow as well? Any hospital that receives medicate fundings are not allowed to dump until they are treated properly?

What is the name of your state, Mattmaine1991?

Here is information on the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), which includes how to report a violation:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1305897/

Here is a link to the law, 42 US Code §1395dd: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1395dd

 

[Mattmaine1991]

I'm located in Virginia.

What about misdiagnosis, delayed diagnosis, delayed treatment, hospital negligents.

 

[justalayman]

Were you a cash customer at the first treatment center?

In short;

A hospital is required to provide emergency treatment to the point a patient is stabilized. After that they can discharge the patient if they do not wish to continue treatment for some reason, such as no obvious means to pay. There are generally exceptions for public (county) hospitals as they are state operated.

 

[quincy]

I'm located in Virginia.

What about misdiagnosis, delayed diagnosis, delayed treatment, hospital negligents.

It appears from what you have said that you should not have been discharged from the first hospital unless it was determined at this hospital that they were not equipped to handle the injury and you needed specialized care elsewhere. Not all hospitals can handle all emergencies. It can be worse for a patient to stay than to be transported to another hospital for care.

You can have your situation personally reviewed by a malpractice attorney if you feel your health was compromised due to the actions (or inactions) of the doctors.

 

[Mattmaine1991]

The hospital I was rushed to was a level 2 trauma center. They had everything needed for treatment. I would see if they told me they couldn't and requested me to be transferred to another hospital. But to determine they couldn't handle the situation they first should of found out my diagnosis. Instead of guessing.

 

[quincy]

You should read through the information provided in the first link I gave you.

Although I think you would benefit from reading it all, you can scroll down to where it says, "EMTALA definition of 'appropriate transfer.'" Read also what it means to be "stabilized."

You can file on your own an EMTALA violation complaint which will be investigated, or you can speak with an attorney in your area. I see the problem with any malpractice suit as one of damages. If you suffered no long-term effects from the transfer, you probably do not have enough to support a lawsuit.

But I think your experience could be worth a personal review.

 

[Mattmaine1991]

I will thank you.

They never offered me medical transportation. I was discharged and I was on my way to another hospital. Didn't make it more then half way and back in a ambulance I go.

 

[quincy]

I will thank you.

They never offered me medical transportation. I was discharged and I was on my way to another hospital. Didn't make it more then half way and back in a ambulance I go.

What a horrible experience for you, Mattmaine. Again, it could be worth your while to discuss this with a lawyer in your area. Good luck.

 

[Mattmaine1991]

Thank you very much! i am in the process of reading everything you sent me.

Just to say the transfer if any would of been said to me or refusal of transfer i would of had to sign documents for and i have all of my medical records and nothing states for a transfer.

the laceration happen at 6:50 in the morning and they placed a tourniquet on me at 7:07 due to the artery not stopping. in my medical records after being seen and stitched up with my hand over my heart for about 2 hours it started to slow down. but in states at 9:00am that the bleeding was still uncontrollable.

 

[quincy]

Thank you very much! i am in the process of reading everything you sent me.

Just to say the transfer if any would of been said to me or refusal of transfer i would of had to sign documents for and i have all of my medical records and nothing states for a transfer.

the laceration happen at 6:50 in the morning and they placed a tourniquet on me at 7:07 due to the artery not stopping. in my medical records after being seen and stitched up with my hand over my heart for about 2 hours it started to slow down. but in states at 9:00am that the bleeding was still uncontrollable.

It sounds to me, from what you have posted, that there was a failure by the first hospital to properly treat your injury. It also sounds as if money (or lack thereof) might have been the cause of this failure.

I hope your hand is healing well and that you have no long-lasting or permanent problems with it.

Good luck.

 

[justalayman]

Uncontrolled arterial bleeding from a severed artery, even a small artery, for 2 hours would result in death. It may not have been able to be stopped completely but it obviously wasn't uncontrolled. Were you actually bleeding when discharged from the first hospital? If so, how often did you need to change the bandages to avoid spillage?

Was going to another hospital and went into shock and was driven the rest of the way by ambulance. They to couldn't believe I was kicked out in the shape I was in. Yet alone offered medical transport. I was given a surgery date and the doctor said that the other hospital had no clue what was real diagnosis was. My new doctor diagnosed me with 4 tendons, and 2 nerves. While in surgery he also found out why I was bleeding like that. I also had a completely severed artery

.

So there was no immediate treatment at the second hospital? Did they do anything at the second hospital (as far as treatment goes) or did they simply stabilize you and send you home with a surgery appointment or did they even have to treat you at all until the surgery?

 

[quincy]

Uncontrolled arterial bleeding from a severed artery, even a small artery, for 2 hours would result in death. It may not have been able to be stopped completely but it obviously wasn't uncontrolled. Were you actually bleeding when discharged from the first hospital? If so, how often did you need to change the bandages to avoid spillage?

He said he was discharged from the first hospital and went into shock, necessitating a trip to the second hospital. The first hospital did not arrange for a transfer.

According to "The Hand Clinic," cutting one main artery in the hand generally does not result in death as would cutting both main arteries to the hand. http://handtoelbow.com/blood-vessel-injuries/

So there was no immediate treatment at the second hospital? Did they do anything at the second hospital (as far as treatment goes) or did they simply stabilize you and send you home with a surgery appointment or did they even have to treat you at all until the surgery?

Although I see where he said he had a "surgery date," he also said he had surgery at the second hospital.

I see the problem Mattmaine has as more of one demonstrating damages enough for a lawsuit ... but even if there is not a supportable malpractice suit, there could still have been a violation of EMTALA.

 

[justalayman]

He said he was discharged from the first hospital and went into shock, necessitating a trip to the second hospital. The first hospital did not arrange for a transfer.



Although I see where he said he had a "surgery date," he also said he had surgery at the second hospital.

Yes, it appears he was discharged and not transferred. Emtala requires a transfer if the patient is in need of immediate care. That suggests the first hospital had treated op until a point he was stable enough to be discharged.

A person can go into shock without prior notice and if he had lost a considerable amount of blood he would be more susceptible to shock. That doesn't mean they were negligent in discharging him as he may have appeared well when discharged but later went into shock with no additional injury.


Whether he was capable of being discharged is something that cannot be determined here.


I see nothing stating or even suggesting he recieved surgery upon his first visit to the second hospital. Why would he need an appointment for surgery if they repaired the damage upon the first visit?

 

[quincy]

Yes, it appears he was discharged and not transferred. Emtala requires a transfer if the patient is in need of immediate care. That suggests the first hospital had treated op until a point he was stable enough to be discharged.

Or it suggests that the first hospital did not want to treat someone who could not pay for the necessary treatments.

The fact that money was mentioned at all during the first visit seems to me to be problematic.

A person can go into shock without prior notice and if he had lost a considerable amount of blood he would be more susceptible to shock. That doesn't mean they were negligent in discharging him as he may have appeared well when discharged but later went into shock with no additional injury.

Whether he was capable of being discharged is something that cannot be determined here.

I agree that we cannot determine anything here. A personal review seems necessary.

I see nothing stating or even suggesting he recieved surgery upon his first visit to the second hospital. Why would he need an appointment for surgery if they repaired the damage upon the first visit?

It sounds as if the damage was not repaired at the first hospital and that surgery was necessary to repair the injury.

Other than that, I don't know.