Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Defending negligence claims.

A Langslow

    Australian Nursing Journal (July 1993)
    |November 24, 1999
    PubMed
    Summary

    Surgical patient injuries outside the operating room suggest substandard care. The Robertson v Hospital Corporation of America case highlights the importance of expert opinion in perioperative nursing and operating room standards.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Gaughan v Bedfordshire Health Authority.

    Australian nursing journal (July 1993)·2002
    Same author

    Nursing and the law. The facts.

    Australian nursing journal (July 1993)·2002
    Same author

    Getting the sponge count right.

    Australian nursing journal (July 1993)·2002
    Same author

    Nursing observations prove critical.

    Australian nursing journal (July 1993)·2002
    Same author

    Informed consent.

    Australian nursing journal (July 1993)·2002
    Same author

    Safety and physical restraint.

    Australian nursing journal (July 1993)·2000

    Area of Science:

    • Medical Malpractice Law
    • Perioperative Nursing
    • Surgical Patient Safety

    Background:

    • Patient injury remote from the operative site raises concerns about the standard of care during surgery.
    • Legal cases involving surgical errors necessitate expert testimony to establish negligence.

    Observation:

    • The 'Robertson v Hospital Corporation of America' case in 1995 centered on patient injury attributed to operating room procedures.
    • This 'positioning' case is particularly relevant for perioperative nurses and the broader field of operating room expert opinion.

    Findings:

    • The case underscores the legal principle that injuries occurring away from the surgical site can imply a breach of duty in the operating room.
    • Expert evidence in a prior case (1994) established anaesthetist responsibility for preventing ulnar nerve injury during bilateral mastectomy.

    Implications:

    • Perioperative nurses and legal professionals should be aware of landmark cases like Robertson v Hospital Corporation of America.
    • These cases shape the understanding of accountability and expert witness roles in surgical adverse events.
    • Establishing clear lines of responsibility for patient safety during surgery is crucial for preventing injuries.

    Related Experiment Videos