As a Board Certified Orthopedic Surgeon I performed hundreds of total hips via an anterolateral approach. I found it very difficult to transition to performing an anterior approach. There is a steep learning curve and I went to several instructional courses that included cadaveric experience and also went through a mentorship process with a younger colleague who had extensive experience. The patients age, and especially their body habitus, also play a role in exposure of the hip socket and proximal femur.
His honesty is no excuse for not being prepared to perform a safe, efficient procedure that minimizes complications. I honestly feel this surgeon was not at all prepared to perform this procedure, especially alone. It is a horrible feeling in the OR when a procedure is not going well, for whatever reason, but the best thing to do is abort the procedure before you make things worse. I feel that this is gross negligence on the surgeons part and hopefully he learns from this and becomes a better surgeon.
Thanks for the comment. It seems that this surgeon was not expecting the complications he ran into, and possibly was lulled into a false sense of confidence by the bit of training he had done.
It is incredibly frustrating how the malpractice and tort law has been taken to the next level. It is evident in this case that the patient knew the risk From infection, pain, and no complete restoration of the patient's surgical condition. Furthermore, The surgeon was precise with the patient and family about the risks and benefits. Why wasn't this conversation and documents brought up during discovery? This case should have been thrown out. The expert witness should
have you been grilled extensively; Dr. Expert Witness, Have you ever had to performed a revision in any of your own joint procedures? That screamed relevance to any objection.
As a Board Certified Orthopedic Surgeon I performed hundreds of total hips via an anterolateral approach. I found it very difficult to transition to performing an anterior approach. There is a steep learning curve and I went to several instructional courses that included cadaveric experience and also went through a mentorship process with a younger colleague who had extensive experience. The patients age, and especially their body habitus, also play a role in exposure of the hip socket and proximal femur.
His honesty is no excuse for not being prepared to perform a safe, efficient procedure that minimizes complications. I honestly feel this surgeon was not at all prepared to perform this procedure, especially alone. It is a horrible feeling in the OR when a procedure is not going well, for whatever reason, but the best thing to do is abort the procedure before you make things worse. I feel that this is gross negligence on the surgeons part and hopefully he learns from this and becomes a better surgeon.
Thanks for the comment. It seems that this surgeon was not expecting the complications he ran into, and possibly was lulled into a false sense of confidence by the bit of training he had done.
It is incredibly frustrating how the malpractice and tort law has been taken to the next level. It is evident in this case that the patient knew the risk From infection, pain, and no complete restoration of the patient's surgical condition. Furthermore, The surgeon was precise with the patient and family about the risks and benefits. Why wasn't this conversation and documents brought up during discovery? This case should have been thrown out. The expert witness should
have you been grilled extensively; Dr. Expert Witness, Have you ever had to performed a revision in any of your own joint procedures? That screamed relevance to any objection.