LEGAL EAGLE EYE NEWSLETTER
For the Nursing Profession


Request a complimentary copy
of our current newsletter


What is our mission?

What publication formats are available?

How do I start a subscription?

Can I cancel and get a refund?

Does my subscription renew automatically?


 

WHAT IS OUR MISSION?
      Our mission is to reduce nurses' fear of the law and to minimize nurses' exposure to litigation.  Nurse managers need to spot potential legal problems and prevent them before they happen. Managers and clinical nurses need to be familiar with how the law is applied by the courts to specific patient-care situations, so that they can act with confidence.  
    We work toward our goals every month by highlighting the very latest important Federal and state court decisions and new Federal regulations directly affecting nurses in hospitals, long term care facilities and home health agencies. We focus on nursing negligence and nurses' employment and licensing issues.    Our readers are professionals in nursing management, nursing education, clinical nursing, healthcare risk management, legal nurse consulting and law.

WHAT PUBLICATION FORMATS ARE AVAILABLE?
     The Email Edition is our most popular format.  You receive the newsletter as a PDF file attachment in an email sent to you every month.  On any computer or mobile device you simply click the file attachment to open, read, download, and/or print the newsletter. 
    The Email Edition is ideally suited to individuals.  It can also be used by large institutions.  Within an institution, like a hospital or university nursing department, an individual subscriber can forward pertinent articles to colleagues within the institution.  The content cannot be forwarded outside the institution or posted online.   An example might be a nursing director or director of nursing education who shares articles with nurse managers in individual clinical departments.
   The Online Edition is a format suited to educational and healthcare facility libraries with multiple users.  We send a link via email for the current monthly newsletter.  To open the link to the newsletter for that month the subscriber or other user must be using a computer or device whose IP address or range of IP addresses we have authenticated and given permission for online access.
     Print, Email and Online formats contain exactly the same content, eight pages with no advertising.

HOW DO I START A SUBSCRIPTION?

    The links below go to secure online sites maintained for us by Square, Inc. for credit and debit card purchases.  At checkout you will provide your name, payment information and email address.

Email Subscription $120/year

Print / Print + Email Subscription $155/year


     If you prefer, you can download and print an order form to mail or to scan and email to us.  Checks, credit and debit cards, purchase orders accepted, or we will bill you.  Order Form

CAN I CANCEL MY SUBSCRIPTION AND GET A REFUND?
     Yes. Just ask and the unused portion of your subscription will be refunded.

DOES MY SUBSCRIPTION RENEW AUTOMATICALLY?
     No. Before your annual subscription runs out you will receive a renewal notice by email and regular mail.

 

 

Legal Eagle Eye Newsletter

For the Nursing Profession

PO Box 1342 Sedona AZ 86339

(206) 718-0861 

 

info@nursinglaw.com 

 

 

 

Patient Falls From Stretcher In E.R.: Court Says Side Rails Were Up, So Hospital Is Not Liable For Patient's Injuries 

  Quick Summary: Hospitals must exercise the degree of care toward each patient that the particular patient's condition requires.

   It is a hospital's legal responsibly to assess each patient, and to protect the patient from dangers that may result from the patient's physical and mental incapacities.

   If a patient in the emergency room is not alert and oriented, the standard of care requires that the patient not be left unattended even for a brief moment. It was noted in the chart, however, that this patient had been assessed and was fully alert and oriented.

   Even so, there was no question the standard of care required the side rails on this patient's emergency room stretcher to be raised up to prevent this patient from falling off the stretcher accidentally.

   It was not noted in the chart, as it should have been, that the rails were up. The court heard conflicting theories, decided the rails actually were up, and ruled in favor of the hospital. COURT OF APPEAL OF LOUISIANA, 1996.

   An eighty-year-old patient fell in a nursing home, struck his head on the floor, and was taken to a hospital emergency room. In the emergency room he was briefly left alone on a hospital stretcher, and ended up on the floor with a fractured hip. The patient had surgery for the fractured hip. Shortly after the surgery he died from a heart attack. The family filed suit for negligence.

   The Court of Appeal of Louisiana upheld the verdict of no negligence entered in favor of the hospital by a lower court.

   The court stated in general terms that hospitals have the legal responsibility to assess each patient's physical and mental capacities, and to tailor the patient's care accordingly. This patient, who came in with a head injury, was given a full score of fifteen on the Glasgow Coma Scale, before he fell from the stretcher. The court said this was proof he was fully alert and oriented, and not in need of continuous visual observation by emergency room personnel, which would have been necessary had he not been fully alert and oriented.

   In an apparent lapse in procedure, the patient had not signed a consent form upon arrival. This did not prove he was not alert and oriented, but happened only because he did not have his glasses and was unable to read the form, according to the court.

   It was not noted in the patient's chart, as it should have been, whether the side rails on the stretcher were put up or left down. However, the court accepted at face value the testimony of the nursing assistant who first found the patient on the floor of the treatment room in the emergency department, that the side rails were up.

   The court preferred to believe the nursing assistant’s testimony over the family's attorney's theory that a patient in this man's condition could not have climbed over the side rails, had they been raised. Parker vs. Hospital, 677 So. 2d 568 (La. App., 1996).