Numbness in Legs After Tailbone Injury

[Yukaday]

My question involves medical malpractice in the state of: MS
I was treated for dehydration and vomiting blood, and severe body aches with 6 or7 liters of IV fluids, a tube to my stomach by way of my nose, IV narcotic pain medicine, and IV antianxiety medicine. I was released later that day under my own care. I have short term amnesia from the meds and cannot recall details for about two days after receiving the meds. The day after the ER visit I realized that I was having severe pain over my tail bone. I went and saw a doctor who diagnosed a broken tail bone and prescribed anti inflammatory and pain pills. I have no recall of how my injury occurred. Now I've developed numbness in both legs (feel like they are "asleep") about 18 hrs a day, moderate to at times severe pain daily, at times all day, and have noticed some mild urinary incontinence. This has negatively affected my ability to work and even our family life. I'm not sure how or even if I should proceed with seeking legal advice. Any advice and/or guidance is greatly appreciated.

[antrc170]

You don't have a case that I can see.

You have several problems. First, it sounds like the ER treated you according to the symptoms displayed and released you. Second, even though you can't remember it doesn't mean the hospital is at fault and there is no way to determine how the accident happened. For all we know you jumped off a cliff for giggles. The second ER visit determined you had a broken bone and addressed the issue. There really isnt a treatment for a broken tail bone except to sit on something soft and limit movement. You definetly need to follow up for the numbness in your legs as it may be a sign of nerve damage. Nothing in your posts indicates that any facility failed to provide you with a reasonable standard of care though.

[Yukaday]

Thank you for the reply. The second doc indicated that I essentially had an anesthetic and that that requires me to have someone be with me, drive me, ensure my safety etc. for the sole purpose of preventing things like what happened from happening. But that's the whole reason me seeking opinions. I'm also to see a neurologist.

[STATcom]

Yukaday, you can try to consult with an injury attorney and lay out your case in better detail if you really think your legal rights have been negatively affected in some way. However, based on the facts you laid out, I'd have to agree with antrc170 that it doesn't sound like you have enough to prove any legal cause of action against the hospital.

Your facts seem to most likely fit a negligence case, either for harm or medical malpractice. The problem is that you're going to have a problem establishing both actual and proximate cause for your injury. There doesn't seem to be a clear link that shows how to hospital directly or indirect caused your tailbone to be broken or aggravated. While you can argue that they failed to diagnose you properly, the problem is that they probably treated you based on the symptoms you described.

Your only hope would be to argue that they should've seen recognized your broken tailbone in their examination and that because of it your injury was worsened. However, an argument like this would be weak and likely very expensive to litigate, even without going to trial.

The better party to go after would be the person/entity that injured you, if there is one.

[Yukaday]

Thank you. What's made this so concerning is the numbness, pain, and incontinence issues that I was told could be the result of my injury and that the symptoms could likely become worse and/or permanent. The broken bone occurred after my release from the ER, not before. Sorry if I was unclear with that. My wife called three different medical facilities and inquired about their policies/procedures for releasing someone after they have received anesthetic-type mind/mood altering substances and all three indicated that it's illegal for them to discharges patients under their own care. They said that they ensure patients have someone with them before drugs of this type are even administered. I wonder what would of happened to me if I were pulled over by the police, in fact, I'm lucky that I wasn't. But anyway those are some very relevant concerns I believe.

[Mr. Knowitall]

What was your diagnosis?

IV narcotic pain medicine, and IV antianxiety medicine

Which ones, and in what amounts?

The broken bone occurred after my release from the ER, not before. Sorry if I was unclear with that.

Previously you stated that you didn't know when it happened, leaving open the possibility that the injury occurred before discharge (although perhaps without anybody at the hospital being made aware of the injury). It is not inconsistent for you to argue that the injury occurred post-discharge.

How did you determine when the injury occurred if you don't recall how it happened?

My wife called three different medical facilities and inquired about their policies/procedures for releasing someone after they have received anesthetic-type mind/mood altering substances and all three indicated that it's illegal for them to discharges patients under their own care.

There is simply no way that they commented on your specific case, but that aside I think you misunderstood what they told your wife. I expect that they told her that they could be liable if they discharged a patient who was still under the effects of sedation, for example if the person fell or was in a car accident while on their way home from the hospital. In your account you deny being injured at the hospital, and you indicate that you were not in an accident on the way home, so you got from the hospital to home without event - that's all a driver would have done for you.

They said that they ensure patients have someone with them before drugs of this type are even administered.

Any comment along that line would have been about scheduled procedures, not emergency procedures. If a clinic schedules an outpatient procedure , they may ask not only that the patient have a driver to take them home but that they show up with the driver and that the driver remain present until the procedure is over, just to be sure that the patient actually will have a ride home. But if you show up at the ER in need of medication or sedation, they're not going to say, for example, "Nope - can't do surgery to close that compound fracture. We would have to sedate you and you don't have a driver here."

[jk]

My question involves medical malpractice in the state of: MS
I was treated for dehydration and vomiting blood, and severe body aches with 6 or7 liters of IV fluids, a tube to my stomach by way of my nose, IV narcotic pain medicine, and IV antianxiety medicine. I was released later that day under my own care. I have short term amnesia from the meds and cannot recall details for about two days after receiving the meds. The day after the ER visit I realized that I was having severe pain over my tail bone. I went and saw a doctor who diagnosed a broken tail bone and prescribed anti inflammatory and pain pills. I have no recall of how my injury occurred. Now I've developed numbness in both legs (feel like they are "asleep") about 18 hrs a day, moderate to at times severe pain daily, at times all day, and have noticed some mild urinary incontinence. This has negatively affected my ability to work and even our family life. I'm not sure how or even if I should proceed with seeking legal advice. Any advice and/or guidance is greatly appreciated.

what caused the original issues? Given the treatment, it would appear you may have not been conscious, or at least coherent when admitted.



Being released the same day you were admitted seems a bit odd given the symptoms and treatment. Did you leave against medical advice?

. I have no recall of how my injury occurred.

then how can you even suggest it happened before, during, or after you went to the hospital?

[Yukaday]

What was your diagnosis?
Diagnoses: dehydration, malaise, gastritis, hemataemesis
Which ones, and in what amounts?
morphine 20mg over about 6hrs, Ativan 4mg one time, phenergan 25mg twice
Previously you stated that you didn't know when it happened, leaving open the possibility that the injury occurred before discharge (although perhaps without anybody at the hospital being made aware of the injury). It is not inconsistent for you to argue that the injury occurred post-discharge.

How did you determine when the injury occurred if you don't recall how it happened?

I was not having acute, sharp, constant tail bone pain before my ER visit; I became aware of it the next day

There is simply no way that they commented on your specific case, but that aside I think you misunderstood what they told your wife. I expect that they told her that they could be liable if they discharged a patient who was still under the effects of sedation, for example if the person fell or was in a car accident while on their way home from the hospital. In your account you deny being injured at the hospital, and you indicate that you were not in an accident on the way home, so you got from the hospital to home without event - that's all a driver would have done for you.

Hence my point. I was given these meds that resulted in a type of amnesia. It's not complete amnesia, just I can't remember hardly any events of that day especially. No they didn't address my specific case they said "any patient" normally is treated that way to ensure safety I suppose.

Any comment along that line would have been about scheduled procedures, not emergency procedures. If a clinic schedules an outpatient procedure , they may ask not only that the patient have a driver to take them home but that they show up with the driver and that the driver remain present until the procedure is over, just to be sure that the patient actually will have a ride home. But if you show up at the ER in need of medication or sedation, they're not going to say, for example, "Nope - can't do surgery to close that compound fracture. We would have to sedate you and you don't have a driver here."

I simply have a hard time believing that this is only done for planned procedures. What would of happened if, God forbid, I crashed into and killed a family?

Thank you for your response.

- - - Updated - - -

what caused the original issues? Given the treatment, it would appear you may have not been conscious, or at least coherent when admitted.
Diagnoses: dehydration, malaise, gastritis, hemataemesis - I felt like I had flu and was awake and alert.

Being released the same day you were admitted seems a bit odd given the symptoms and treatment. Did you leave against medical advice?

No, I was released. I agree this seems odd


then how can you even suggest it happened before, during, or after you went to the hospital?

Hence my point. The meds altered my mood/mind. The injury didn't exist before my ER visit. I wasn't made aware by the hospital of injuring myself while at the hospital. I became acutely aware of tail bone pain the next day.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, my apologies for the layout of my responses. I need to learn the proper quote buttons to use.

[Mr. Knowitall]

So you truly believe that a hospital will not give any anesthetizing medication to an ER patient until they produce somebody who will drive them home? You are 100% dead wrong, and if hospitals followed your belief there would be a huge number of deaths and other severe, negative consequences to patients as a result, but if facts and common sense won't sway you I'm not interested in arguing the point. But again, you say you made it home without incident, so it's pretty safe to conclude that you didn't hurt your tailbone in a car accident on the way home - the issue of not having a driver is thus moot.

You appear to be backing off of your claim that you know that the injury occurred after you left the E.R., and are reverting to your prior claim that you have no idea when it occurred. It doesn't help us when you change your story.

You are being awfully cagey about what led to your condition and hospitalization. Was the gastritis, etc., precipitated by alcohol abuse?

[Yukaday]

Why has your tone changed to be so defensive. I'm simply challenging your view/opinion. I've not changed my story at all. I made clarifications to your wrong assumptions. I'm terribly sorry if I've offended you by doing this. You seem to do this on a lot of other's posts as well so I won't take it as you singling me out.