Resource Library

A failure to communicate between the surgeon and the anesthesiologist to monitor oxygen during surgery resulted in a fire in the operating room and burns suffered by the patient.

This case illustrates how challenging it can be to correctly diagnose certain types of corneal infections. When a diagnosis cannot be reached and a patient continues to deteriorate, it is prudent to promptly refer the patient on to a specialist for further examination and testing.

Over the last two years, OMIC has seen an increase in the frequency of cataract surgery claims. In response, Risk Management performed an in-depth analysis of 2016-2020 claims involving premium cataract services and our findings are detailed in the lead article.

Credibility is essential in successfully defending a lawsuit. When chart notes are altered or made outside the patient’s chart, this significantly decreases the credibility of an insured. Such chart alterations and outside notes after an adverse outcome can hinder the defense of a case and leads to increased settlement value.

Advising patients to seek care locally when timely treatment is critical and the patient is not located close to the practice is key to successfully defending a claim.

This was a “perfect storm” for the plaintiff: the equipment had inherent design flaws that complicated the insured’s and the technician’s set up of the microkeratome, making both the manufacturer and the ophthalmologist liable for the harm.

Use of excess gas cases usually have devastating visual outcomes and often result in expensive settlements.

Both OMIC-insured cornea specialists were referred patients with the diagnosis of HSV, and they both continued to use this condition as their working diagnosis even though there were symptoms suggestive of acanthamoeba and the patients’ conditions did not improve. Under these circumstances, according to both defense and plaintiff experts, acanthamoeba needed to be considered.

OMIC has seen several sizeable settlements resulting from failure to diagnose giant cell arteritis cases in the past few years. The settlements are large because GCA, if diagnosis does not occur or is delayed, often leads to bilateral blindness in elderly patients. OMIC’s claims related to GCA have and continue to be problematic and are extremely difficult to defend in front of a jury.

Stress of litigation can be overwhelming. The first case settled at the insured's request because he could not bear the stress of a potential trial. The second case also settled after the insured took a medical leave due partially to the stress of litigation.

It would have been risky to try this case in front of a jury with a young child who experienced a complete loss of vision in one eye with phthisis bulbi. There was the potential for a large plaintiff verdict, so the case was settled prior to trial. If endophthalmitis is remotely suspected, it is best to err on the side of caution and either ask the patient to come into the office immediately, or instruct them to go to the closest emergency room.