Scribd
Upload
12 views2 pages

Overview

Good lr

Uploaded by

Jagdish Patel
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
12 views2 pages

Overview

Good lr

Uploaded by

Jagdish Patel
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Here’s a simplified version of the case:

A 66-year-old Hispanic man who didn’t speak English was sent to Dr. A, an eye surgeon, to evaluate his
cataracts. Dr. A, with very limited Spanish, didn’t use an interpreter to communicate with the patient.

During the exam, the patient’s vision was poor, and while his eye pressure was normal, the optic nerve
showed some signs that could indicate glaucoma. However, no further glaucoma testing was done. Dr. A
recommended cataract surgery because the patient’s cataracts were affecting his daily life.

The first cataract surgery on the left eye went fine, but the day after surgery, the patient’s eye pressure
spiked very high (55–70). Dr. B, the optometrist, informed Dr. A about this. Dr. A wanted the patient to
visit her office that day to fix the issue, but the patient couldn’t come because of transportation
problems. Instead, he was started on eye drops and told to visit the next day.

The next day, Dr. A’s optometrist checked the patient and noted some improvement in eye pressure but
continued vision problems. The patient was told to keep using the drops and return in a week. Instead,
he went back to Dr. B’s office, where his eye pressure was normal, but his vision was still poor. This was
reported to Dr. A’s office, but no one followed up.

Later, the patient’s daughter called Dr. A’s office to report that her father’s vision was still bad. The staff
asked him to come in the same day, but again, he couldn’t due to transportation issues. When he finally
saw Dr. A’s team, his vision was very poor, and the optic nerve damage had worsened. He was sent to a
university eye clinic, where the doctor said he was likely permanently blind in the left eye due to
mismanagement.

A lawsuit was filed against Dr. A, and the case was settled. It highlighted issues like poor communication
(not using an interpreter), delayed care, and lack of follow-up, all of which contributed to the bad
outcome.

Let me know if you’d like any more details!


Here’s an even simpler version of the case:

A 66-year-old man who didn’t speak English went to Dr. A for cataract surgery. Dr. A didn’t use an
interpreter to talk with him.

Before surgery, the patient’s eye pressure was normal, but there were signs of possible glaucoma. Dr. A
didn’t do more tests for glaucoma and went ahead with the surgery.

After the surgery on the left eye, the patient’s eye pressure became dangerously high. Dr. A wanted the
patient to come to her office, but he couldn’t because he didn’t have a way to get there. She gave him
eye drops instead.

When the patient came back, his eye pressure was better, but his vision was still very poor. He went to
another doctor, Dr. B, who said his eye pressure was normal, but his vision didn’t improve. This
information was sent to Dr. A, but nothing was done.

Later, the patient’s daughter called Dr. A’s office because his vision was still bad. When the patient finally
saw Dr. A’s team again, they found that he had serious optic nerve damage. He was sent to another
specialist, who said the damage was permanent and that Dr. A had mishandled the case.

The patient became blind in his left eye and filed a lawsuit against Dr. A. The case was settled because of
mistakes like poor communication, delays in treatment, and missed follow-ups.

Let me know if you need more help!

You might also like