abuse or just a mistake

Confused??

1. Why is the patient restrained to begin with?

2. Why can't the nurse explain the need for a foley and obtain consent prior to inserting?

I just may not understand you speciality and the protocols.

Is the alleged abuse that she did it while they were restrained? They must have given consent for a Foley, since they knew they would need one during surgery.

Plenty of people get catheters without anesthesia and its not abuse--

I guess I dont understand.

I'm a bit confused, too. We put foleys in all the time with patients who are awake and have had no type of sedation or analgesia. However, this is after a thorough explanation and consent from the patient. But, like the previous poster said, maybe its just your specialty and that you do things differently than we do on the floors.

"I have knowledge of"

Did you see this yourself?

What is the hospital policy regarding this?

This doesn't make any sense.

I'm not sure how it is abuse or a mistake unless you are talking about putting restraints on a person to insert a foley rather than waiting for them to be anesthetized. I put foleys in patients regularly and being in restraints has zero bearing on their need for a foley. When placing a foley in a patient who is restrained I certainly don't take them out of restraints to do it!

If you are talking about alert and oriented patients who need a foley for surgery, why would you need restraints or need to wait for them to be sedated? I can see why you might wait for them to be sedated but doing it without sedation is hardly abuse provided you have consent! And if they didn't consent, why on earth would you put it in anyway?

HappyNurse2005 said:

Plenty of people get catheters without anesthesia and its not abuse--

I guess I dont understand.

It may not be abuse, but for some people it is an extremely painful process. Had this happened to me I would be horrified, my body does not react well to having a foley put in initially. When I had my last child (4th) I specifically asked that they wait to do my foley until after I had been given my spinal block because of the pain, spasms, and the fact that I still urinate around it after it is placed at first (guessing due to the spasms). The nurses at the time treated me like I was being overly dramatic, and insisted on doing it beforehand since my doctor had not yet arrived I conceded. This was the most unpleasant part of my stay at the hospital, I had to deal with the pain and spasms until I finally got my spinal block. When I told the nurse I was urinating all over myself, she informed me it was impossible, and my water must have broke!! She was an idiot!

If the routine was for me to get the catheter after I was under, it would have avoided any of the above I had to go through. So Yes I think it could be traumatic enough to be considered abuse for some patients. If the standard/orders are to do the foley after the patient is under anesthesia, then the nurse should abide by that out of respect for the patient.

The post does not make sense.

If the patient is about to undergo anesthesia the foley can wait until the patient is put to sleep. Why is this patient in restraints?

I agree that further clarification must take place before an informative discussion can ensue.

nassir said:

I have knowledge of a scrub nurse who feels it is perfectly fine to put in foleys while patients are in restraints but before they are anesthetized (conscious sedation). The amnesia has been hiding her deeds. But recently a patient remembered and has ptsd because of it. Of course everyone is denying it and the hospital won't say anything since the patient is screaming abuse. Any recommendations.

Ummmm I'm confused. More info?

Restraints? ? Not really used in the OR unless it's a prisoner or someone who is severely intellectually disabled. Unless by restraints you mean lithotomy stirrups? The patient is usually asleep before we position though.

Why would the scrub nurse not just wait until the patient is asleep? This is common sense and much better for the patient.

I could obviously be wrong, but OP sounds a bit like a med-mal attorney on a fishing expedition.