Birth Injury Attorneys

Queens, NY

Queens Birth Injury Infection Case

 

This is an example of a medical malpractice case that our lawyers successfully handled for a Queens mother and her infant son. This Queens birth injury case involves a failure to properly treat an infection, which caused the child to develop cerebral palsy.

 

On September 26th, the mother presented to the defendant Queens hospital to give birth to her son. A second year resident, defendant doctor #1, performed a sonogram and examination. 

 

The sonogram, which was performed before 4:30 a.m., revealed an amniotic fluid index of 2.9 (substantially abnormal).  Admission orders timed at 4:40 a.m. show that Ampicillin was ordered.  Defendant doctor #1 wrote a note timed at 4:30 a.m.  From defendant doctor #1's examination (before 4:30 a.m.), the mother was in labor (i.e., “painful” contractions every 3 minutes and 2-3 centimeters dilated), with 90% effacement, an estimated fetal weight of 8 lbs., station of -3, and “mild” to “moderate” variable decelerations with each contraction.  An “OB Attending” note dated September 26th discussing defendant doctor #1's examination, states “decreased variability”.  Defendant doctor #1 diagnosed oligohydramnios and “post dates”.

 

Prior to the mother being admitted to the defendant Queens hospital, defendant doctor #2 had been her attending obstetrician.  However, given a “covering” arrangement that defendant doctor #2 had with defendant doctor #3, it was defendant doctor #3 who became the attending physician for the mother’s care at the defendant Queens hospital.

 

According to defendant doctor #1's note timed at 4:30 a.m., she discussed the case with defendant doctor #3 earlier that morning.  Defendant doctor #3 testified that he did not know of the mother’s pregnancy until he was called on September 26th by defendant doctor #1.  From the “Patient Labor Record”, defendant doctor #3 first examined the patient at 6:05 a.m.

 

Defendant doctor #1 testified that in general, when a patient is admitted to the
hospital, an external fetal heart monitor is applied.  From defendant doctor #1's testimony, it is evident that the patient was being monitored as of 3:40 a.m. on September 26th.

 

Concerning the fetal heart tracings, defendant doctor #1 testified to decelerations, or “loss of information” on the fetal heart tracings.  Despite the absence of an attending physician and the forseeability of cord compression, there was artificial rupture of the membranes at 5:15 a.m.  It is unclear when an internal fetal monitor was initially placed.  There is no evidence of assessment of fetal status via, for example, fetal scalp testing, until 6:35 a.m.  Such assessment of fetal status was not done until after the baby had already sustained substantial bradycardia. There was also no amnioinfusion given, even though there was substantially decreased amniotic fluid, post date pregnancy, etc.,  defendant doctor #3 testified that he did not give amnioinfusion because when he “came in the patient was going to deliver very shortly”.

 

There is no notation in the record of the baby descending down the birth canal below zero (0) station until the delivery itself, when defendant doctor #3 noted that the station was +3.  On the “Delivery Record”, the “indication” noted for the delivery was “non-reassuring” fetal heart rate tracing.  The baby was delivered by forceps delivery at 6:50 a.m. on September 26th.  Birth weight was 3.18 kg.  Apgar scores were noted to be 9 at 1 minute and 9 at 5 minutes.

 

The baby was admitted to the hospital’s special care nursery following his birth on September 26th and remained under the care of the defendant Queens hospital through September 28th, when he was transferred to a New York hospital.        

 

The baby’s attending pediatrician at the defendant Queens hospital following birth wrote a note dated September 27 stating, among other things, that the baby sustained meconium staining and “probable” meconium aspiration syndrome, irritable central nervous system.  The baby’s attending pediatrician testified that since his September 27th note did not mention that the baby had a small head circumference, such would be an indication that he thought the baby had a head circumference within “normal parameters”.  He testified that a baby with meconium staining would have been exposed to the meconium in-utero, and that this exposure would have been for more than one (1) hour prior to delivery.

 

The baby’s attending pediatrician testified that upon transfer to the New York hospital, one of the discharge diagnoses was “persistent fetal circulation”.  According to the baby’s attending physician, “persistent fetal circulation” is a syndrome that “usually applies” to post-term babies, and is “sometimes associated” with hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy or “significant” hypoxia in the perinatal time period.

 

Treatment of the baby at the New York hospital showed that diagnosis of severe respiratory distress, meconium aspiration syndrome, and persistent pulmonary hypertension.  A variety of studies were performed at the New York hospital, and a pediatric echocardiogram performed on September 28th showed severe pulmonary hypertension with moderate tricuspid regurgitation.  An MRI of the brain performed on October 15th showed bilateral diffuse white matter injury and other injury consistent with hypoxic injury.           
                                   
The attending pediatrician testified that he was the baby’s treating pediatrician at present as of the date of his deposition.  He also testified that the baby, among other things: has microcephaly; has “severe” seizure disorder; is blind; is considered failure to thrive and didn’t thrive; “interacts with some sounds and some minimal smiling but doesn’t appear to be social”; has reactive airway asthma secondary to a reflux problem; and feeds through a tube.  The baby’s attending pediatrician testified that these condition(s) are all “related” to one another.

 

When the baby was transferred to the New York hospital 48 hours after his delivery, he finally received the care that he needed for the problem of persistent fetal circulation.  However, by this point, the damage had already been done, since the baby went without the care that he really needed for the first 48 hours of his life.

As a result of the negligence and medical malpractice of the defendant hospital and doctors, the infant plaintiff is neurologically devastated and completely dependent on others for his care and well being.  He has cerebral palsy, spastic quadriplegia, microcephaly, and cortical blindness.  He is wheelchair bound and relies on his parents and other caretakers completely as a result of his birth injury.

 

As a result of the medical malpractice that occurred in the defendant Queens hospital, the infant plaintiff and his family received a substantial multimillion dollar recovery.

 

If you or a loved one has had a difficult delivery and have questions about the quality of the medical care you received, please call Silberstein, Awad & Miklos' birth injury lawyers for answers. Together we will continue our fight against FRIVOLOUS DEFENSES and DECEPTIVE DEFENSES.
file #3878

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Silberstein, Awad & Miklos, P.C.
Call Us Toll Free
1.877. ASK 4 SAM