Chargers Team Doctor accidentally punctured Tyrod’s lung; Herbert to start week 3

[YoloinOhio]

 

[mannc]

30 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

I’m a physician. There is a difference between malpractice and a known complication. The physician can do everything correctly and a complication can still occur. Of course he/she could have also committed malpractice by not ensuring he was in the correct area or not paying attention to what he/she is doing.  The consent does not absolve the physician of liability especially if they commit an error. Explaining potential complications to a patient is part of informed consent.  It does not waive a patient’s rights.

We mark the surgical site before surgery to ensure the correct site is used when laterality is an issue. We have right and left knees, breasts, feet, eyes, lungs. It’s imperative to double check xrays and check with the patient before surgery. Many errors can occur solely relying on the physician order or notes where right and left can be mistakenly entered into the record. You can not tell the difference between a right and left knee on X-ray or MRI unless it is properly labeled.

Here is the right answer, folks.  

[purple haze]

4 hours ago, K-9 said:

I think this is correct. I’m wondering if, because this procedure has a known risk of pneumothorax, the doctor explained that risk and/or had TT sign a disclaimer before it was administered. I wonder if the team, physician, and league are indemnified as a result.

From what I recall of a legal class I took, a person cannot truly sign away their rights.  If something happened that was negligent 

a person can still sue and win compensation.  In this case, knowing the risk does not negate the fact that the doctor works for

the team and the team has a vested interest in Taylor playing the game.  Taylor's general health is not necessarily the team's 

main concern.

[Kirby Jackson]

27 minutes ago, FireChans said:

You can easily argue the sky is green.

 

Thats still not how it works.

This isn’t anything like that. It also isn’t like your typical med mal case. I guess we will see but I will be SHOCKED if he doesn’t receive a significant chunk of change. 

[purple haze]

4 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I had eye surgery a few years back due to an old injury.  It took me a few years to decide to go through with it, and as they were getting ready to put me under, the nurse confirmed which eye the surgery was on, grabbed a magic marker and made an X over it.  She told me it can get confusing for the doctor depending on where he was standing.  It was not all that reassuring and I started to ask more questions and the lights went out.  

 

 

I donated a kidney 10 years ago.  I wrote a sign that I taped to my chest before being wheeled to surgery:

 

I AM NOT HERE FOR CASTRATION OR AMPUTATION.

 

The sign worked.  LOL

[PirateHookerMD]

41 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

I’m a physician. There is a difference between malpractice and a known complication. The physician can do everything correctly and a complication can still occur. Of course he/she could have also committed malpractice by not ensuring he was in the correct area or not paying attention to what he/she is doing.  The consent does not absolve the physician of liability especially if they commit an error. Explaining potential complications to a patient is part of informed consent.  It does not waive a patient’s rights.

We mark the surgical site before surgery to ensure the correct site is used when laterality is an issue. We have right and left knees, breasts, feet, eyes, lungs. It’s imperative to double check xrays and check with the patient before surgery. Many errors can occur solely relying on the physician order or notes where right and left can be mistakenly entered into the record. You can not tell the difference between a right and left knee on X-ray or MRI unless it is properly labeled.

 

When the outcome is a known complication, there is no way you can call that an "error." This poor physician is getting killed in the court of public opinion and is likely top notch and feels horrible. 

 

If he gave him a cardiac tamponade, then you can talk to me about error. I am in a procedurally based specialty and this thread makes me cringe. 

[K-9]

9 minutes ago, purple haze said:

From what I recall of a legal class I took, a person cannot truly sign away their rights.  If something happened that was negligent 

a person can still sue and win compensation.  In this case, knowing the risk does not negate the fact that the doctor works for

the team and the team has a vested interest in Taylor playing the game.  Taylor's general health is not necessarily the team's 

main concern.

I appreciate the input. Regarding the bold text; if the team has a vested interest in Taylor playing the game, then isn’t that interest vested in his health by extension, thus making his health a chief concern?

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

9 minutes ago, purple haze said:

I donated a kidney 10 years ago.  I wrote a sign that I taped to my chest before being wheeled to surgery:

 

I AM NOT HERE FOR CASTRATION OR AMPUTATION.

 

The sign worked.  LOL

That’s hysterical!!

[Teddy KGB]

11 minutes ago, PirateHookerMD said:

 

When the outcome is a known complication, there is no way you can call that an "error." This poor physician is getting killed in the court of public opinion and is likely top notch and feels horrible. 

 

If he gave him a cardiac tamponade, then you can talk to me about error. I am in a procedurally based specialty and this thread makes me cringe. 

 

 

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

54 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

I’m a physician. There is a difference between malpractice and a known complication. The physician can do everything correctly and a complication can still occur. Of course he/she could have also committed malpractice by not ensuring he was in the correct area or not paying attention to what he/she is doing.  The consent does not absolve the physician of liability especially if they commit an error. Explaining potential complications to a patient is part of informed consent.  It does not waive a patient’s rights.

We mark the surgical site before surgery to ensure the correct site is used when laterality is an issue. We have right and left knees, breasts, feet, eyes, lungs. It’s imperative to double check xrays and check with the patient before surgery. Many errors can occur solely relying on the physician order or notes where right and left can be mistakenly entered into the record. You can not tell the difference between a right and left knee on X-ray or MRI unless it is properly labeled.

Awesome feedback and thanks.  I understood the large blue X on my forehead once I thought about it, but some things just strike me as funny after the dust settles.  
 

The doc who did my surgery is well regarded in the field and apparently has a great reputation—some call him the Bruce Dickinson of ocular manipulation—but it occurred to me that for all his book learnin and schoolin  the entire process could have been brought to its knees if someone left the cap off the sharpie an hour earlier.  
 

 

[Matt_In_NH]

1 hour ago, RyanC883 said:

 

if your arguing that he was legally coerced into signing it, that will be difficult to prove.   That said, he will get paid because it's likely you can't waive away rights you haven't yet acquired (why many "waivers" are unenforceable).  It's why doctors have insurance.  Although, he's not going to make a ton here (by med mal standards), really just pain and suffering. Lost wages are unlikely, unless he can prove he is missing out on a performance bonus or game bonus.  

 

the way Herbert was playing, why did Lynn have him on the bench!   Also, Lynn said that TT is still the starter, which is bonkers.

I know.  But he also punted on 4th and 1 in OT.  Not sure why he is so loyal to Tyrol.  I like Lynn but he is not long for HC.   

[PirateHookerMD]

 

 

Good commentary 

[Mr. Wonderful]

8 hours ago, ndirish1978 said:

What an imbecile

 

There are risks with ANY medical procedure.  So before you call anyone an imbecile, know that Tyrod signed a consent and was advised a pneumothorax was a potential complication of the procedure.   

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, PirateHookerMD said:

When the outcome is a known complication, there is no way you can call that an "error." This poor physician is getting killed in the court of public opinion and is likely top notch and feels horrible.

 

I'm sure he feels horrible.

 

As far as whether it's just "one of those things" or resulted from a procedural error, none of us know; the fact is, the rate of pneumothorax in these procedures falls as the experience of the physician increases, and with use of ultrasound as I understand it.  More than one thing can be true; it can be true that pneumothorax is a known complication of the procedure AND that Taylors pneumothorax resulted from a procedural error or lack of due care.

[RyanC883]

4 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

This situation is different than typical medial malpractice because the patient didn’t pick the doctor.

 

The settlement will get big if Tyrod’s team can prove that his future earnings are negatively impacted because he ends up not playing. I would imagine that the Chargers guarantee all of his potential bonuses this year. If Herbert doesn’t look back (which looks to be the case) Taylor’s people could argue that his future was negatively impacted because of it. Again, it is all with a settlement in mind. 

 

of course that's what he can argue, but he likely does get to pick the doctor.  That's not really at issue here.  And he would have to prove that he would have kept his starting job, unlikely given how Hibbert would have played.  It's going to be difficult to prove.  

[Saint Doug]

9 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

It happens all of the time no doubt. However, unlike  when I go to the doctor that doctor works for my employer. My employer has a vested interest in me taking that injection. It is already under review by the NFLPA. They aren’t going to take this “it happens.” There will be a substantial payout. 

Are you saying that he shouldn’t have received a nerve block for a cracked rib? Pneumothorax is a known complication of the procedure. They’ll just show the NFLPA the informed consent he signed before the procedure. The better question, which has nothing to do with the pneumo, is why he was preparing to play in a football game with a fractured rib? I would love to know what the CBA says about this and who agreed this was permissible. 

5 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

This situation is different than typical medial malpractice because the patient didn’t pick the doctor.

 

The settlement will get big if Tyrod’s team can prove that his future earnings are negatively impacted because he ends up not playing. I would imagine that the Chargers guarantee all of his potential bonuses this year. If Herbert doesn’t look back (which looks to be the case) Taylor’s people could argue that his future was negatively impacted because of it. Again, it is all with a settlement in mind. 

He picked the doctor when he signed his name on the informed consent document. No one forces a procedure on anyone. He could also say he would like a 2nd opinion. Now, if the team did not formally document a signed consent prior to the procedure, then they deserve what’s coming to them. 

[Augie]

I think this is getting WAY too much attention. Who amongst us has NOT deflated the lung of an NFL QB minutes before a game?   🤷‍♂️

 

Let us not cast the first stone! 

[The Frankish Reich]

6 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

Patients who suffer complications of procedures and then sue always challenge the consent they signed.  Unless the consent form is woefully incomplete and not standard and the circumstances under which it was signed involved s patient signed include them not being mentally competent to sign, these challenges are usually pointless. 

 

if he didn’t sign one then that’s another issue.  But if the doc documents a proper consenting conversation at the time, he should be ok.   

Chao is horrible 

Is that Dr. David Chao? The guy with all the licensing issues noted in that tweet?

By the way, we never would have heard of this pain killing injection had it not gone so horribly wrong. The NFL needs to be transparent about this stuff, like horse racing where they get a little "running on Lasix" note.

[JohnNord]

This is a complete BS move by the doctor.  Insane. 

[The Wiz]

5 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:

 

Apparently this was all Tyrod's fault.  The doctor was supposed to administer the shot to the 4th rib but Tyrod told him that he was positive it was the 5th rib.  The doctor of course didn't believe Tyrod so he told the doctor to check down a rib.

 

But honestly do feel bad for him.  That's one of the strangest things I've probably heard related to a pre-game injury (right up there with slipping on gym mats and blowing out your knee).