Did You Know?
allnurses is the largest community for nurses on the web. We now have over 388,238 members! Join today to network with other nurses, laugh, share, and much more.
| Advertisement Sponsored Links | | | | No. 101 |
Mar 16, 2008, 11:34 PM
Re: Quaid twins victims of overstaffing... Originally Posted by SharonH, RN I think you may be giving the position of nurses too much credit. I wish we were that esteemed. I can guarantee you if he sued the nurse and won, that wouldn't affect his box office one whit especially since he would have been well within his rights.
Hey, you ARE esteemed - and if somebody says you aren't, well you know what they can do! Whether or not he could prove damages in court, you know this person lost their license. A license can be lost for forgetting to chart - so even if there weren't lasting damages, this situation is over the top. Gotta read the fine print on those bottles yes sirree! I'm not sure if the old stock that was used had an expired date on it.
On another slant to this infinitely fascinating story, do you think "vanity" surrogacy is a private matter between a women and the surrogate? I've done some research on this, and it accounts for around ten percent of surrogacies in the US. Last I checked, indentured servitude was banned worldwide in 1948. No coffee breaks in pregnancy. As well, if I tried to sell one of my organs to the highest bidder, to be sure it wouldn't be a private matter between me and the receiver. But for the most part, the laws are far behind our technology. This is one example among many. Think I'm going to watch "The Matrix" again.
Diahni
| | No. 102 |
Mar 17, 2008, 08:32 AM
Re: Quaid twins victims of understaffing...
I'm not going to hold my breath for Dennis Quaid to come to the rescue of healthcare and medical error prevention. Errors happen everywhere, every day - the only difference is that they happen to us "common folk". The only reason that anyone cares about what happened to him is because he used to be considered a hot Hollywood star. He's gone through women like kleenex over the past 25 years which makes me think he loses interest easily. I am not going to be impressed until I see that he follows through with effecting positive change and doesn't lose interest in the cause after a few years have gone by or his Hollywood popularity is gone. It always sounds great to say you are going to open a foundation for this and that but lots of people say it and nothing ever happens.
| | No. 103 |
Mar 17, 2008, 09:16 AM
Re: Quaid twins victims of understaffing... Originally Posted by RN1989 I'm not going to hold my breath for Dennis Quaid to come to the rescue of healthcare and medical error prevention. Errors happen everywhere, every day - the only difference is that they happen to us "common folk".
RN1989: Yes, this is a huge problem. There will always been human error, but understaffing is but one thing that fuels it. I keep accidentally writing "overstaffing" - maybe I'm thinking "overload" above all else. In recent history, I have noticed that these kind of things are also happening to the "noncommon" among us. Why is this? Some talk show host - Glenn Beck - had to wait a very long time in the ER, and made a public stink about it. Even if some illuminary is doing it for the publicity, it still brings important issues to light. In the past couple of months, both an elderly neighbor and a friend's father had med error type situations happen to them and I live in a very sparsely populated place.I don't have to tell you of all people how endemic this is - 200,000 die a year from med errors - awful.
RN: The only reason that anyone cares about what happened to him is because he used to be considered a hot Hollywood star. He's gone through women like kleenex over the past 25 years which makes me think he loses interest easily. I am not going to be impressed until I see that he follows through with effecting positive change and doesn't lose interest in the cause after a few years have gone by or his Hollywood popularity is gone. It always sounds great to say you are going to open a foundation for this and that but lots of people say it and nothing ever happens.
D: Quaid is/was quite the babe - but maybe this can be used for public good. I was very turned off to idea of political celebs - "limosine liberals" I thought what Jane Fonda "Hanoi Jane" did in Vietnam was awful - before your time, but she posed on a North Viet tank - And I was very opposed to the war, still I found it insulting to the US. But I'm coming around. Look at what Brad Pitt is doing in N'orleans - he has a love of architecture and is involved in encouraging rich people to contribute, all or partly to some very cool flood proof hurricane proof houses. I want one! His wife does a lot of humanitarian things too. Self serving? Probably. But so what if they are actually doing some good.
Nobody is as surprised at me that I'm not so cynical about movie stars getting their hands dirty. Natalie Portman recently said that it pains her that while she can get an audience with a hot shot senator, or the senate in general, while the head of a relief organization can not. Given that this is both revolting and true, I admire that she's working with "what is."
Can Quaid make a difference? I see it this way - if the many nurses and pharm people, etc. who watched that show had a few moments of pondering about the situation, that's good. I worry about those annoying souls who keep grabbing the medication to double check that you're not messing up with their meds. These folks, no doubt, watched the show, too. As a paying medical consumer on one hand and a nurse on another, I do see it both ways. It's even happened to me recently - an ER doc saw an inflamed insect bite on me and dosed me with huge amounts of antibiotics for Lyme, which I didn't have. The bite wasn't even the reason I was in the ER. I could have said yes sir, and taken the full ten course of meds but I didn't. I'm all for anything that educates the public about pharmaceuticals in this pill popping age.
Diahni
| | No. 104 |
Mar 17, 2008, 11:03 AM
Re: Quaid twins victims of understaffing...
self disclaimer: I was a student nurse in '89. had to give it up. And now will graduate in 30 days (woot)
Ok so ....back the first time I went to nursing school....there used to be a med nurse. I wonder why they don't go back to that. Someone whose sole job for that shift was giving meds.
Do you all know why that changed and if you think it would be good to do again?
| | No. 105 |
Mar 17, 2008, 11:19 AM
Re: Quaid twins victims of understaffing... Originally Posted by la bellota self disclaimer: I was a student nurse in '89. had to give it up. And now will graduate in 30 days (woot)
Ok so ....back the first time I went to nursing school....there used to be a med nurse. I wonder why they don't go back to that. Someone whose sole job for that shift was giving meds.
Do you all know why that changed and if you think it would be good to do again?
Given that this is such a huge safety issue, one would think that at least one other person, other than the dispensing nurse, would have some oversight. Aren't nurses in the best position to make changes to improve safety?
Diahni
| | No. 106 |
Mar 17, 2008, 11:30 AM
Re: Quaid twins victims of overstaffing... Originally Posted by Freedom42 This will be featured tonight on "60 Minutes." The details have been posted in lengthy threads on this forum. I'm not aware of the moderators editing or deleting any of those posts.
As I recall, staffing was not the issue when the Quaid children were overdosed. The hospital still had heparin on its shelves that bore old labels. A nurse did not check the label and overdosed the children.
The Quaids are going after the drug company because they have no cause of action against the hospital or the nurse. That's because the children were given the antidote and recovered. Had they been damaged, the family would have a claim. I don't doubt that their lawyer gave another reason when speaking to a reporter about not going after the nurse, though. To say "we don't have a claim" diminishes the public view of their case.
It seems like if a nurse gave the wrong dose, there is a cause of action against that nurse, doesn't it? Not that it would have been solely the nurse's error, as the bottle should have been totally distinctively labeled and the pharmacy director should have been part of that labeling effort and Nursing directors should have had a hand in getting it properly labeled. But the nurse who actually made the error, unfortunately, is also liable. Right?
Are the twins alright?
| | No. 107 |
Mar 17, 2008, 11:57 AM
Re: Quaid twins victims of overstaffing... Originally Posted by bollweevil It seems like if a nurse gave the wrong dose, there is a cause of action against that nurse, doesn't it? Not that it would have been solely the nurse's error, as the bottle should have been totally distinctively labeled and the pharmacy director should have been part of that labeling effort and Nursing directors should have had a hand in getting it properly labeled. But the nurse who actually made the error, unfortunately, is also liable. Right?
Are the twins alright?
I think they are - two issues - were there damages? There weren't, though the parents might think a period of extreme worry are indeed damages. Secondly, to be sure, the nurse lost her license, though I don't know for sure. When you sue somebody, you have to prove damages, which is hard to do, even in car accidents. Nothing like this kind of case that reminds me of the grave responsibility of dispensing a serious medication. Somebody else mentioned there should be double checks on med dispensing. Here's a parallel - writers know it's wise to have somebody else check and edit their work. It's hard to see our errors when we're the ones that made them in the first place. Making a typo vis a vis a med error is no comparison! A good question is this: If there are pushing two hundred thousand FATAL errors (got this stat from the net,) shouldn't there be more than one person checking on the five "rights"??? Nobody wants to die, or have a loved one die from an unnecessary error, and nobody wants to cause one. Same old same old: where is administration on this?
| | No. 108 |
Mar 17, 2008, 12:52 PM
Updated
Mar 17, 2008 at 12:54 PM by Jolie
Re: Quaid twins victims of understaffing...
Dahni,
A few points in your post jump out at me. First of all, simply because the babies did not suffer permanent injury that we know of, (They are infants, with many years of growth and development ahead of them during which deficits may become apparent.) does not mean that there are no damages. They spent more time in NICU than was otherwise necessary, were separated from their parents, were exposed to painful treatment, and their parents undoubtedly experienced extreme mental anguish over the possibility of losing their previously relatively healthy infants.
Secondly, unless it can be demonstrated that the nurse acted recklessly or intentionally, s/he may not (and probably should not) lose her license over this incident. The problem of mis-identifying heparin strengths is an issue that was well-known to the manufacturer, (who refused to address it following a similar incident in Indianapolis in which 3 babies died) and should have been well-known to any hospital with a NICU. Administration of a drug ultimately rests with the nurse caring for the baby, a huge responsibility. But not every error in medication administration is solely the fault of the nurse. There are systems errors that allowed the manufacturer to continue to supply medication in packaging that was likely to be confused, technicians (who are not pharmacists) who stock medication and are more likely to make a mistake in stocking than a pharmacist, unit-based policies and procedures (established by management) that do not require cross-checking of medications like heparin flush, which are regarded to be "routine" meds, and staffing issues (determined by administration) that may put time pressure on nurses caring for too many babies.
To insist that only the nurse administering the medication be disciplined is short-sighted, ineffective and does nothing to prevent future errors.
As for medication nurses - they are sometimes utilized in team-nursing settings, a care-delivery system that is not at all appropriate for a NICU, or any intensive-care setting.
| | No. 109 |
Mar 17, 2008, 01:03 PM
Re: Quaid twins victims of understaffing... Originally Posted by Jolie Dahni,
A few points in your post jump out at me. First of all, simply because the babies did not suffer permanent injury that we know of, (They are infants, with many years of growth and development ahead of them during which deficits may become apparent.) does not mean that there are no damages. They spent more time in NICU than was otherwise necessary, were separated from their parents, were exposed to painful treatment, and their parents undoubtedly experienced extreme mental anguish over the possibility of losing their previously relatively healthy infants.
Jolie: You're right - who knows what the long term will bring? As well, you never know the source of the problem - some people are convinced that vaccinations cause autism in their kids - they may or may not be right, but either way, it can be so hard to prove.
J:Secondly, unless it can be demonstrated that the nurse acted recklessly or intentionally, s/he may not (and probably should not) lose her license over this incident.
D: Good to know - I was taken aback when I saw on a nursing license list that many people lost licenses for "charting errors" -could this be? Yes, it's a huge responsibility, but to err is human, as well.
The problem of mis-identifying heparin strengths is an issue that was well-known to the manufacturer, (who refused to address it following a similar incident in Indianapolis in which 3 babies died) and should have been well-known to any hospital with a NICU. Administration of a drug ultimately rests with the nurse caring for the baby, a huge responsibility. But not every error in medication administration is solely the fault of the nurse. There are systems errors that allowed the manufacturer to continue to supply medication in packaging that was likely to be confused, technicians (who are not pharmacists) who stock medication and are more likely to make a mistake in stocking than a pharmacist, unit-based policies and procedures that do not require cross-checking of medications like heparin flush, which are regarded to be "routine" meds, and staffing issues that may put time pressure on nurses caring for too many babies.
To insist that only the nurse administering the medication be disciplined is short-sighted and ineffective.
As for medication nurses - they are sometimes utilized in team-nursing settings, a care-delivery system that is not at all appropriate for a NICU, or any intensive-care setting.
D: Nothing like being overly cautious. How ironic that a heparin flush is considered both "routine" and can cause such damage.
Though celebrities may expect special treatment no matter where they go, these kind of mistakes can affect anybody.
About the disciplining of nurses, my sister - a nurse of 30 years said to me: you make a mistake? your fault. The md makes a mistake? your fault.
Is she being too cynical?
Diahni
| | 259 members
2,365 guests 2,624 | 1 | | | 12 | | | 2 | | | 9 | | | 17 | | | 11 | | | 14 | | | 16 | | | 37 | | | 14 | | | 20 | | | 23 | | | 19 | | | 24 | | | 10 | | |
Nursing News