Question

Which of the following best describes why, in the Fatal Air Embolism Case Study, it mattered whether the jury found any of the providers to have been "reckless" in addition to negligent?

Answer 1

In the fatal embolism case study, the jury found that the conduct of all three providers--Ms. Technician, Dr Relief, and Dr Primary--was "reckless."

The technician has left the room without warning Dr Relief or Dr Primary regarding the adverse effects of using a pressure cough on the infusion bag, in spite of her knowledge on it.

Dr Relief found a pressure cuff and placed it on the bag without noticing the warning on the bag that specifically cautioned against applying a pressure cuff.

When the Technician noticed that the blood had completely emptied from the reinfusion bag, she tapped Dr Primary on the arm to inform him the bag was empty but she had not notified how long the line had been empty.

Dr Primary had left the patient for a lunch break as per the advice of Dr Relief and had not notified the pressure cuff on the infusion bag. No conversation took place between Dr Primary and Technician after Dr Primary returned from his break.