Medical Malpractice Claim Filed By Patient Whose Doctor Did Not Complete Cancer Screening Tests
Posted: Saturday, October 17, 2009
by Joseph Hernandez
Prostate cancer affects African-American men differently from the rest of the population. Men of African-American descent are at higher risk of developing prostate cancer. As such, doctors generally recommend that African-American men should begin screening for prostate cancer earlier (the recommended age being 45) so as to increase the likelihood that if they do develop cancer it can be detected at an early stage while it is still curable. When physicians fail to follow the guidelines for cancer screening and their patient is later diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer that doctor may be liable for medical malpractice.
There are two separate tests which are used to screen male patients for cancer of the prostate. The first is a physical examination of the prostate gland. The other is a simple blood test which is used to determine the level of prostate specific antigen (PSA) in the male's system. The physician did conduct a physical examination of the prostate in partial completion of the patient's request. On physical examination, the physician did not detect any abnormalities with the prostate gland: the gland was not enlarged, it was not hardened, and there were no nodules present. Blood testing was then ordered by the physician. The tests, however, did not include a PSA test. The patient, given his request and the fact that the doctor had done a physical examination, assumed that a PSA test was also ordered. The patient believed the reason he did not hear anything from his doctor about the results of the tests was that they were had all come back normal. The patient saw the same doctor two years later. This time the doctor neither performed a physical examination of the prostate gland nor did the doctor order a PSA test.
What this physician did was to give the patient a false sense of security. By performing the digital examination of the prostate gland and ordering blood tests the physician left the patient with the perception that a full screening had been completed. Under the circumstances, a patient would believe that the order for blood tests from the second visit included the PSA test. Either way, however, a patient certainly would be justified in believing he had undergone a full screening.
The patient returned later in the year but this time he was seen by another physician in the practice. This doctor performed a digital examination and order a PSA test. The patient was diagnosed with prostate cancer that had metastasized to the bone. This patient did not wish to wait until the age of forty-five which is when most African-American men are first screened for colon cancer. He wanted to do it earlier and the doctor's behavior lead him to be he had been properly screened as he requested.
The law firm that represented the patient tried the case. At the end of the trial the jury returned a verdict in favor of the patient for $2.75 million. An appeal was filed by the defense. A settlement was reached by the two parties during the appeals process. The amount of the settlement was not made public. The exact amount of the settlement is not public knowledge but it was less than the amount of the verdict. By reaching a settlement before the Appeals Court rules the two parties can eliminate the possibility that the ruling will be against them. The appeal was later denied by the Appeals Court.
--------
Joseph Hernandez is an Attorney focused on catastrophic injury and medical malpractice cases. To learn more about prostate cancer metastasis cases visit his website at http://www.prostatecancerlaw.com.
This Article has been viewed 1 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
No comments yet.We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.