Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the San Jose area, such as Kaiser Permanente, Regional Medical Center, Good Samaritan Hospital, Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, or O’Connor Hospital.
(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)
On April 20, 2007, Georgeson was admitted to a hospital in Sacramento as she had become unresponsive due to a stroke. A CT scan of the brain performed on the same day showed no hemorrhage.
A CT Scan taken April 21 indicated a stroke involving the basal ganglia, internal capsule and right mid-brain. Georgeson was a “do not resuscitate” patient and life support was discontinued that day.
Georgeson’s widower and children sued Levine, alleging that a cardioversion must not be performed unless a patient is adequately anti-coagulated pursuant to American College of Cardiology Guidelines, both before and after cardioversion, and that Levine’s decision to proceed with cardioversion with the patient unprotected, given the inadequate anticoagulation, was below the standard of accepted care. The plaintiffs contended that Georgeson sustained a cardioembolic stroke three days after her cardioversion which resulted in her death.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
Defense counsel argued that Georgeson had refused Coumadin in the past, even though she complained of significant symptoms and had been advised that her stroke risk was between 8 and 18 percent per year associated with chronic atrial fibrillation.
Levine testified that, though it was not documented, Georgeson would agree to take Coumadin for 30 days only. He further testified that although Georgeson’s international normalized ratio (INR), a standard of blood coagulation time, was non-therapeutic at 1.1 on the date of the cardioversion, the patient was so advised and she agreed to proceed with the cardioversion.
Defense counsel contended that Georgeson sustained a stroke of the posterior cerebral artery distribution as a result of an artery-to-artery thromboembolism similar to the stroke which had occurred in 2000.
Defense counsel did not contend the losses incurred by the plaintiffs.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.