IHP420 Final.docx - Running head ITURRALDE V HILO MEDICAL CENTER USA ANALYSIS Jessica Webber Southern New Hampshire University IHP-420 Ethical Legal

IHP420 Final.docx - Running head ITURRALDE V HILO MEDICAL...

This preview shows page 1 - 4 out of 10 pages.

Running head: ITURRALDE V. HILO MEDICAL CENTER USA ANALYSIS1Jessica WebberSouthern New Hampshire UniversityIHP-420 Ethical & Legal ConsiderationsProfessor Catherine VonGarlemApril 20, 2018
Background image
ITURRALDE V. HILO MEDICAL CENTER USA ANALYSIS2In the case of Iturralde v. Hilo Medical Center USA, the plaintiff is Rosalinda Iturralde who was acting on behalf of the patient, Arturo Iturralde’s estate and the defendants included Dr. Robert Ricketson and the Hilo Medical Center USA. Rosalinda Iturralde was Arturo’s younger sister and caregiver and sued on behalf of Arturo Iturralde because of his passing. The beginning of Arturo’s care at Hilo Medical Center USA was in January 24th, 2001 and the final decision, in favor of Rosalinda, wasn’t made until September 10th, 2007. This case started all because Arturo Iturralde needed a spinal fusion that was to be done by Dr. Ricketson at the Hilo Medical Center USA on January 29, 2001. In summary, the hospital had to order the kit for Arturo’s surgery and once the kit arrived at the hospital, no inventory was taken of the kit which happens to be hospital policy. The surgery was started without the inventory and only after Dr. Ricketson had already removed part of Arturo’s spine, was he informed that the rods needed for the surgery were missing. He improvised and instead of using the correct titanium rods, he implanted a section from a surgical screwdriver shaft that had come in the kit. Dr. Ricketson, nor the hospital told Arturo or Rosalinda what had happened. Arturo started physical therapy following surgery and the following day, likely due to one or more falls, the screwdriver shaft shattered. Arturo was operated on again on February 5th, 2001 to remove the screwdriver and implant the correct rods. Following that surgery, Arturo was released, and hishealth continued to go downhill. He required regular catheterization, became depressed, was often in great pain, and reportedly lost his will to keep going. The rods eventually became dislodged and Arturo needed two additional surgeries and rehabilitation. Following all of this, hiscondition continued to get worse – he ended up undergoing permanent catheterization and suffered from bouts of urosepsis which resulted in multiple hospitalizations and ER visits. He
Background image
ITURRALDE V. HILO MEDICAL CENTER USA ANALYSIS3eventually became completely bedridden and passed away from complications of urosepsis on June 18th, 2003.The court is deciding a question of both fact and law for this case. Dr. Ricketson implanted a screwdriver shaft that was not approved for human implantation, which is malpractice. The fact that Dr. Ricketson and the hospital didn’t follow hospital policy and conduct an inventory on the kit when it arrived, was negligence. If inventory had been conductedwhen the kit arrived, the missing titanium rods would have been discovered prior to the surgery.
Background image
Image of page 4

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 10 pages?

  • Spring '16
  • osborn
  • Physician, Health care provider, Informed consent, Hilo Medical Center, Robert Ricketson

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture