第十二篇 Inquest told of hospital error
A HOSPITAL error left a dying man on the wrong ward for two days as deep vein thrombosis (DVT) ravaged his body, an inquest heard. Stephen Melvin Newbold suffered massive brain damage when a blood clot formed in his veins. Now his families are considering legal action against York Hospital, saying that his death was “untimely and unnecessary”.
Mr Newbold, a 52-year-old maintenance worker, went to York Hospital on November 3 complaining of a swollen right foot. He should have been sent to a surgical ward where he would have been treated with1 Fragmin, a drug which counters the effects of DVT. However, hospital staff wrongly admitted him to2 an orthopedic ward, where he stayed for two days, before finally being transferred to the care of a consultant vascular surgeon. Twenty-four hours later, on November 6, doctors decided they would have to operate to remove his leg below the knee.
The operation went ahead on November 10, but two days later Mr Newbold suffered a cardiac arrest. A scan revealed he had had a pulmonary embolism, a condition related to DVT. Mr Newbold suffered brain damage and died in the hospital on November 16.
Giving evidence, the surgeon said he could not explain why Mr Newbold had been admitted to an orthopedic ward where it was not policy to administer Fragmin. He did not know why his medical team had not given Mr Newbold the drug later.
York coroner Donald Coverdale said, “From November 3 until the day of the operation, no Fragmin was given to Mr Newbold. If he had been admitted to a consultant vascular surgeon’s care from day one, it is clear that Fragmin would have been prescribed. Fragmin reduces the risk of DVT, but does not eliminate it. It is impossible to say whether Mr Newbold would have suffered this DVT if he had received the Fragmin.” He recorded a verdict of death by misadventure.
Kim Daniells, Mr Newbold’s family’s lawyer, said, “The family hope that the hospital will learn from the errors, and that no other families will have to suffer in the future.”
A spokeswoman for York Hospital’s NHS Trust said, “We would like to extend our sincere sympathies to the family of Stephen Newbold during this difficult time.”
詞匯：
ward n.病房
vein n.血管
thrombosis n.血栓
clot n.凝塊
maintenance n.維修，維護(hù)
Fragmin n.法安明(又名片段化蛋白)
staff n.員工;職工
consultant n.顧問，咨詢，會(huì)診醫(yī)師
surgeon n.心血管外科顧問
knee n.膝蓋
embolism n.栓塞;栓塞形成
verdict n.裁決
misadventure n.災(zāi)難，不幸遭遇，意外事故
sympathy n.同情
注釋：
1.be treated with...被用......藥物進(jìn)行治療
2.be admitted to...被收容至，被移送至(本文中是 醫(yī)學(xué).全.在線整.理.搜集“被送至病房”)
練習(xí)：
1.The patient was admitted with an injured foot.
A Right B Wrong C Not Mentioned
2.The patient was admitted to the surgical ward.
A Right B Wrong C Not Mentioned
3.The patient did not get the correct medication.
A Right B Wrong C Not Mentioned
4.The patient died before he could be operated on.
A Right B Wrong C Not Mentioned
5.The patient died of brain damage.
A Right B Wrong C Not Mentioned
6.It was decided that the patient’s death had been an accident.
A Right B Wrong C Not Mentioned
7.Mr Newbold’s family’s lawyer was not qualified.
A Right B Wrong C Not Mentioned
答案與題解：
1.A 從文中第二段的第一句話可以看出，病人是因?yàn)楦杏X右腳脹痛而去醫(yī)院的(a swollen right foot)，而從文章第二段的第三行最后一句話(However, hospital staff...)可以看出他是被醫(yī)院容留住院了，只不過是去錯(cuò)了病房。
2.B 從文章第二段第三行最后一句話可以看出，病人起初并未被直接送至外科病房，而是被送去了骨科病房，從第二段第四行整句話可以看出，病人在骨科病房被觀察了兩日后才被轉(zhuǎn)送進(jìn)行心血管診斷。
3.A 本題答題線索有兩點(diǎn)，首先在文章第二段的第二行第二句話中提到了病人本應(yīng)該被給予法安明這種藥物進(jìn)行治療的，should have done有“本應(yīng)做卻沒有做”的意思，后面第三句話中however這個(gè)轉(zhuǎn)折詞也進(jìn)一步說明了這一點(diǎn)。其次是從第四、五段中對(duì)法安明這種藥物進(jìn)行介紹時(shí)可看出，病人并沒有及時(shí)被給予正確的藥物治療。
4.B 文章第三段進(jìn)行了介紹，即手術(shù)是11月10號(hào)進(jìn)行的，而本段最后一句話說明病人在11月16號(hào)因大腦創(chuàng)傷而死亡，故不正確。
5.A 文章第三段中最后一句話說明了在飽受腦創(chuàng)傷折磨后，病人于11月16號(hào)在醫(yī)院中死亡。
6.B 從文章的第一段第一句話就可以判斷出，病人是由于醫(yī)院的失誤而致死的(a hospital error left a dying man...)，并非意外致死。
7.C 文章中的第六段講到，Newbold一家的律師轉(zhuǎn)達(dá)了其希望醫(yī)院從這次事故中汲取教訓(xùn)，從而使更多其他家庭免遭類似的不幸,但是并沒有說起律師不合格這樣的信息。
