Surgical procedures, while often life-enhancing, carry inherent risks. Among the most debilitating complications of surgery is nerve damage, which can profoundly impact a patient’s quality of life. When such injuries result from a surgeon’s negligence, they may constitute surgical malpractice. This blog delves into the nuances of surgical and medical malpractice related to nerve damage, highlighting key legal precedents in Ontario that shape this area of law.
Defining Surgical Malpractice
Surgical malpractice occurs when a healthcare professional falls below the accepted standard of care during a surgical procedure, leading to patient harm. This deviation can manifest as errors in technique, inadequate preoperative planning, or insufficient postoperative care. To establish a claim of surgical malpractice, the plaintiff must demonstrate:
- Duty of Care: The surgeon owed a professional duty to the patient.
- Breach of Standard of Care: The surgeon failed to meet the established medical standards.
- Causation: The breach resulted in injury.
- Damages: The patient suffered quantifiable harm as a result.
Nerve Damage in Surgical Contexts
Nerve damage during surgery can arise from various factors. Excessive force and applying undue pressure can injure nerves. Improper positioning of the patient’s body during surgery can dangerously stretch or compress nerves for an extended period of time. Surgical errors, including accidental cuts that sever nerves entirely, can also cause long-term suffering.
The consequences of nerve damage range from temporary numbness to permanent paralysis, significantly affecting a patient’s daily life and earning capacity. Some patients may experience chronic pain, reduced mobility, or an inability to perform tasks essential to their occupation, leading to long-term financial and emotional strain.
Dallner v. Gladwell: A Case Study in Surgical Negligence and Nerve Damage
A pivotal case illustrating surgical malpractice involving nerve damage is the recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Dallner v. Gladwell. In this case, the plaintiff underwent shoulder replacement surgery which was performed by the defendant, Dr. Gladwell. During the operation, the patient experienced a severe brachial plexus injury.
Abrachial plexus injury happens when the network of nerves that control the shoulder, arm, and hand gets stretched, compressed, or even torn. These nerves come from the spine in the neck area and branch out to give movement and feeling to the upper limbs.
As a result of this surgical injury, the plaintiff suffered permanent nerve damage and impaired mobility.
Expert Testimony Determined Injury Highly Unusual
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice examined whether the defendant surgeon breached the standard of care during the procedure. Evidence revealed the injury likely resulted from excessive force or prolonged stretching of the patient’s arm, particularly during exposure of the glenoid socket. The Court noted that while nerve injuries can occur despite proper precautions, the severity in this instance suggested a deviation from accepted medical practice.
Expert testimony played a crucial role. The plaintiff’s expert contended that such an injury was highly unusual and indicative of negligence. Conversely, the defence argued that the surgery adhered to standard protocols and that the injury could stem from the patient’s unique anatomy or pre-existing conditions. However, the Court found the defence’s explanations unconvincing, emphasizing the lack of documented pre-existing vulnerabilities and inconsistencies in the surgeon’s account.
Ultimately, the Court held the surgeon liable for the plaintiff’s injuries. The parties had already agreed on damages, the amount of which was not disclosed in the Court’s decision.
The Role of Expert Testimony in Medical Malpractice Cases
As demonstrated in Dallner v. Gladwell, expert testimony is indispensable in medical malpractice cases, particularly those involving surgeon negligence. Medical experts provide insight into whether the surgical care deviated from accepted practices and if such deviations directly caused the injury. Their assessments help courts determine the standard of care, i.e., what a reasonably competent practitioner would have done in similar circumstances. They also help assess whether the particular surgeon’s actions fell short of this standard and if the surgeon’s breach of their duty of care is linked to the patient’s injury.
In Dallner, expert opinions were pivotal in establishing that the Plaintiff’s nerve damage was not a typical complication but likely resulted from surgical negligence.
Implications for Medical Professionals and Patients
For medical practitioners, cases like Dallner underscore the importance of several critical principles, including:
- Informed Consent: As set out in the Supreme Court of Canada case of Reibl v. Hughes, surgeons must provide patients with comprehensive information about potential risks, outcomes, of the proposed treatment or surgery.
- Adherence to Protocols: Deviation from established surgical guidelines and best practices which result in injury may lead to a finding of liability against the surgeon.
- Documentation: Medical practitioners must keep detailed records of surgical procedures and patient interactions to support that they met the appropriate standard of care.
Patients, on the other hand, should feel empowered to do the following:
- Ask Questions: Patients should ask as many questions as required to understand the risks and benefits of a proposed surgery or procedure
- Seek Second Opinions: When uncertain about a procedure, patients should feel empowered to consult multiple professionals before deciding how to proceed.
- Document Symptoms: Patients should keep a detailed account of postoperative experiences to aid in potential future claims.
The Path to Justice for Malpractice Victims
Victims of surgical malpractice often face significant challenges, including financial burdens due to lost income and medical expenses, emotional distress, and physical pain. Pursuing a legal claim can help patients recover compensation for various damages, including out-of-pocket medical costs for corrective procedures and ongoing rehabilitation. By using experts such as an actuary, plaintiffs can quantify their claims for for lost income.
In addition to the more readily quantifiable types of loss, general damages are meant to compensate a plaintiff for the intangible impacts of a botched surgery, including pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life.
A successful malpractice claim requires a thorough review of medical records, expert testimony, and legal representation from an experienced medical malpractice lawyer. Given the complexity of these cases, seeking legal advice promptly is crucial to preserving evidence and ensuring compliance with statutory deadlines.
Contact Tierney Stauffer LLP for Skilled Advocacy in Surgical Malpractice Claims in Ottawa
Surgical malpractice involving nerve damage is a complex intersection of medical practice and legal accountability. Both practitioners and patients must remain informed and vigilant to navigate the intricacies of surgical procedures and their potential legal ramifications.
At Tierney Stauffer LLP, our team of dynamic medical malpractice lawyers provide comprehensive advice and representation to individuals injured by surgeon negligence. We are dedicated to holding medical practitioners accountable for losses suffered by our clients at their hands. Our firm has been a trusted fixture in Ottawa’s legal community for over 40 years and proudly serves clients in Cornwall, Kingston, and North Bay. To discuss your medical malpractice case, please contact us online or call 1-888-799-8057.
