Reading Hospital To Pay $1.3M In Medical Malpractice Suit

Reading Hospital To Pay $1.3M In Medical Malpractice Suit

Introduction

Reading Hospital was sentenced by a Berks County jury to pay $1.3 million to a former patient who sued the hospital for medical misconduct.

According to court records, the jury held the hospital guilty of failing to detect and treat a carotid dissection experienced by the lady of West Reading in 2016.

According to the lawsuit, the hospital was irresponsible in her care, which resulted in her injuries. The hospital's owner and the staff working at the hospital had no comment on the ruling or the complaint.

In October 2016, the plaintiff went to Reading Hospital after suffering some stroke-like symptoms at home. With the exception of mild numbness and a headache, her symptoms had nearly completely subsided by the time she arrived at the hospital.

The ER doctors swiftly performed a CT scan on her, which was negative. The doctors did not request any more tests that would have shown the vasculature and arteries. Given her brief neurological symptoms and the necessity to rule out a carotid dissection, the lady argued this was a divergence in the standard of treatment.

She had an ischemic stroke in the hospital few hours later because her carotid dissection went untreated, causing a clot to lodge in her brain. Essentially, the hospital had a window of opportunity to detect and treat her disease before it caused a catastrophic stroke, but its professionals did not take advantage of it.

Reading Hospital denied any wrongdoing and disputed that any claimed wrongdoing caused or contributed to her injuries. According to the hospital, she had no lasting damage and had recovered to her neurological baseline.

The plaintiff demonstrated physical restrictions with her left hand, some facial palsy, and a disastrous shift in her voice, which is now robotic and lacking any discernible intonation. She further claimed that the injuries caused her emotional pain, shame, and disgrace.

The monetary award was just for pain and suffering; it did not cover lost wages or projected future medical expenditures.