Introduction
The case “Stents in the cardiac cath lab” is written by Dale Buchbinder. The case study in question is an example of professional misconduct, which harmed the patient and resulted in a collective lawsuit against the hospital and the responsible cardiologist. The cardiac surgeon had ties with a cardiac stent manufacturer performing surgeries on patients that did not need a stent. This paper will discuss “Stents in the Cardiac Cath Lab” and provide an assessment of the main facts, situation, and background.
Facts in this Case
Dr. Knowitall has been working in the Merciful Medical Center (MMC) in Omaha, Nebraska as a cardiac surgeon. Typically, he performed many surgeries, most of which were catheterizations. However, one patient complained that his cardiac catheterization surgery was unnecessary and later proceeded by filing a lawsuit. This led to other former patients of Dr. Knowitall joining the lawsuit, and an internal investigation was launched.
Initially, the investigators found that Dr. Knowitall falsified test data and recommended surgery to patients who did not need it. Moreover, further investigation shows a conflict of interest since Dr. Knowitall has a lifestyle that an invasive cardiologist would be unable to afford (Buchbinder & Shanks, 2012). The investigators find evidence that Dr. Knowitall has ties with a company that manufactures stents. He performed at some of their events, one of which was hosted in his home. Hence, the large number of stent surgeries and Dr. Knowitall’s association with this company points to a violation of ethical principles by this surgeon.
This case study is not merely about a surgeon who profited from working with a stent manufacturer and performing at the conferences and events organized by this business. Dr. Knowitall performed surgeries on patients who had no indication, based on tests and assessments, for a cardiologic stent surgery. As Markose, Krishnan, and Ramesh (2016) states, “issues in medical ethics often involve life and death,” which is why it is vital for medical professionals to practice in accordance with ethical standards (p. 1). Ethics is concerned with making the right choice, and in this case study, Dr. Knowitall prioritized his wealth and well-being over that of his patients. Clearly, this case demonstrates that the hospital’s administration has to implement a policy that would require checking the patient’s test results before a stent surgery. The obligation of this doctor and the hospital, as well as any other medical institution, is to care for the patient’s health.
Notably, in this case, it is acknowledged that Dr. Knowitall was a busy surgeon and performed surgeries on many members of this hospital or their family members. This can be another hint that the management of the healthcare facility can use to investigate similar cases or prevent this from happening again. Since, as Markose, Krishnan, and Ramesh (2016) note, hospitals, and healthcare facilities “render service to humanity; reward or financial gain is a subordinate consideration” (p. 1). Therefore, this case study is a precaution against prioritizing financial gain over a patient’s well-being.
Conclusion
Overall, this paper is a case study about the cardiologists who violated practice standards and medical ethics principles. Dr. Knowitall advised and performed stent surgery on patients who, based on tests, did not need it. It appears that this surgeon gained profit through his ties with the stent manufacturer, which was the main motivation for his actions. Based on this case, the hospital’s management should work on ensuring that patients are not harmed by unnecessary surgeries, which can be done by independently checking the test results before these procedures.
References
Buchbinder, S. B., & Shanks, N. H. (Eds.). (2012). Introduction to health care management (2nd ed.). Jones & Bartlett.
Markose, A., Krishnan, R., & Ramesh, M. (2016). Medical ethics. Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences, 8(Suppl 1), S1–S4. Web.