Legal Review & Commentary: An employee, hepatitis C, and a $3.5 million verdict
An employee, hepatitis C, and a $3.5 million verdict
News: A floor nurse discovered she had hepatitis C six years after testing positive for the disease. The nurse and her former spouse sued the nurse’s employer for withholding the information and were awarded $2.9 million and $575,000, respectively.
Background: Through accidental needlesticks and spills, the floor nurse was exposed to patients’ blood three times between July 1991 and March 1997 at the hospital where she was employed. During that period, the nurse claimed that she was tested at least three times for hepatitis exposure during routine medical staff screenings and testing after exposures.
During those six years, the nurse, who was married, gave birth to two healthy children. Toward the end of that time, she and her husband separated and eventually divorced.
In February 1998, following a conversation with a supervisor over whether she had tested positive for hepatitis C during routine staff medical screenings, she personally reviewed her files in the office computer and discovered that her first positive diagnosis was dated December 1992. Hospital officials failed to inform her that she had tested positive.
During the next year, the nurse and her former spouse brought suit against the hospital for failure to properly and legally inform her of her positive test finding or alternatively that the hospital falsely informed her that her testings were negative. As a result of her exposure to and contracting hepatitis C, the nurse suffered from the symptoms of the disease, including chronic fatigue and severe irritability. Although this form of hepatitis can be sexually transmitted to a partner, and in utero to infants, neither her former husband nor her children were infected.
The jury awarded the nurse $2.9 million and her former husband $575,000. An appeal is expected; the hospital will likely claim that the nurse’s only recourse was through worker’s compensation.
What this means to you: Exposure to patients’ blood poses a potential work injury for most all health care practitioners. However, when coupled with the failure to inform the health worker of positive test results, the hospital exposed itself to liability.
"There are definitely two separate issues presented in this case. One involves a workers’ compensation claim for the initial injuries by needlestick and/or spill, and the second is a legal claim for failure to disclose the information," states Patricia Specian, MSN, JD, risk manager at West Palm Beach, FL-based Columbia Hospital.
"Any employee injured in a work-related injury in any setting should be referred for treatment, as needed. And injuries related to the incident should be covered under workers’ compensation — including follow-up care, missed work, and counseling, if needed. Many health care providers, and particularly hospitals have an employee health nurse or clinic where employees may seek medical care, but regardless this nurse should have been treated, tested, and informed immediately," she adds.
Although the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act was not passed until 2000, which postdates this case, all health care organizations were required to have a needlestick prevention program in place under standards established under OSHA in 1991. The risks of infection from a contaminated needle or blood spill are well known, and unfortunately such incidents were very prolific at the time the nurse was first exposed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that health care workers sustained more than 600,000 such injuries annually with most involving nurses.
Technology has addressed some of the prevalence of needlestick injuries, but in all such instances. Health care workers should be encouraged to report all incidents, and those injuries should be treated accordingly.
"The hospital’s failure to inform the nurse of her adverse test results was a breach of duty on behalf of the hospital. Had the nurse known from the outset that her results were positive, she could have sought timely medical treatment and counseling. Additionally, had the nurse known she could have taken precautions during intercourse with her husband and also received counseling as to the advisability of becoming pregnant and inherent risks related to children she would conceive," Specian says.
Although the hospital was not responsible for the sharps injury, unless they failed to implement safety precautions to prevent such occurrences —and we have nothing to indicate that in the record — they were responsible for prompt notification in the event of positive lab findings. "In my opinion, the $3 million award is excessive, despite seemingly the sympathetic plaintiff. Additionally, the ex-husband’s award is questionable as he was not infected and due to lack of knowledge, did not undergo any type of emotional trauma during the period with which he could have converted. It will be interesting to see what happens with the appeal," concludes Specian.
Reference
• Passaic County (NJ) Superior Court, Case No. L2395-99.
A floor nurse discovered she had hepatitis C six years after testing positive for the disease. The nurse and her former spouse sued the nurses employer for withholding the information and were awarded $2.9 million and $575,000, respectively.
Subscribe Now for Access
You have reached your article limit for the month. We hope you found our articles both enjoyable and insightful. For information on new subscriptions, product trials, alternative billing arrangements or group and site discounts please call 800-688-2421. We look forward to having you as a long-term member of the Relias Media community.