 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Murphy v. Bernice Community Rehabilitation Hospital10/26/2005
ent. She asserts that BCRH failed to follow its policy for patients at risk for falling. Under this policy, BCRH should have either encouraged family to stay or provided a sitter for Ms. Murphy. She also contends that BCRH's aides were not informed of her fall risk or left-sided weakness; thus, they neither used proper equipment, particularly a gait belt, nor called for additional assistance to transfer her in the bathroom. Additionally, BCRH assigned an aide who was 7 months pregnant and could not provide proper assistance to a woman of Ms. Murphy's size. Ms. Murphy also argues that BCRH did not follow its first aid fall policy in that no one called a physician to examine her immediately after the fall. She claims that this failure denied her a definitive diagnosis of her injury when it occurred. Lastly, Ms. Murphy contends that BCRH should have informed a physician once a nurse assessed left-sided weakness at admission and should have restricted her walking or standing until her symptoms abated.
Testifying as an expert in nursing on behalf of Ms. Murphy, Shelly Hebert asserted that BCRH did not meet the standard of care in treating Ms. Murphy. Hebert asserted that the nurses did not devise a plan of care to address Ms. Murphy's needs. She testified that BCRH did not follow through on its fall risk assessment by providing a sitter or baby monitor in the room or encouraging Ms. Murphy's family to stay with her. Hebert testified that BCRH violated its transfer safety rules by not providing Ms. Murphy with an aide with sufficient strength to assist her and by not providing proper equipment, such as a gait belt, to safely transfer Ms. Murphy. She did not believe there was enough room for a safe transfer in the bathroom and suggested that the aides should have used a potty chair next to Ms. Murphy's bed. Hebert also testified that BCRH's actions fell below the standard of care after the incident when no one called a physician to examine Ms. Murphy. On cross-examination, Hebert admitted that it was appropriate for an aide to get behind Ms. Murphy to cushion her as she was lowered to the floor. She also admitted that BCRH's records showed no complaints by Ms. Murphy after the incident.
The two aides assisting Ms. Murphy at the time of the incident also testified. Lavonia Holmes Robinson, who was 7 months pregnant, was assigned to Ms. Murphy but testified that she did not have much recall of the incident. She did recall entering the bathroom and seeing Ms. Murphy propped up on the knees of Latasha Watson Robinson, who eased Ms. Murphy to the floor with the right leg turned at the knee toward the back. Lavonia then went to get help.
Latasha testified that Lavonia's pregnancy was the reason she was helping her with Ms. Murphy. When Ms. Murphy said that her leg was giving out, Latasha got behind her and eased her to the floor as she had been trained to do. She stated that Ms. Murphy's left leg was extended straight out in front of her and the right leg was bent behind at the knee. Lavonia went for help, and then a nurse came to assist and straightened Ms. Murphy's leg. Latasha testified that she heard the right leg pop. She also testified that Ms. Murphy complained about some pain but did not specify which leg was bothering her. Latasha testified that she was not aware that Ms. Murphy was a fall risk, but she would have asked for more help or for instructions from the physical therapist if she had known of the fall risk. However, Latasha did not believe that a gait belt would have helped. She would have still had to lower Ms. Murphy to the floor once her leg gave out. Moreover, she understood that Ms. Murphy was a maximum assist patient. Several days after the incident and after Ms. Murphy was at
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Louisiana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|