Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Pacemaker procedure trauma not attributable to medical negligence
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The High Court has dismissed a claim for pain and anxiety allegedly experienced during a pacemaker insertion procedure, on the grounds that there was no evidence of negligence by the medical staff. The plaintiff's claims of unrelenting pain were not supported by contemporaneous medical records or witness testimony. The court determined that the anaesthesia and analgesia provided were adequate, and the plaintiff's anxiety did not manifest in a way that required pharmacological intervention. The plaintiff's tearfulness post-procedure was noted but did not raise clinical concerns warranting medical attention.
Pacemaker insertion, anxiety, medical negligence, anaesthesia, analgesia, fentanyl, procedural monitoring, physiological data, blood pressure, heart rate, informed consent, sedation, midazolam, psychiatric injury, pain management, clinical assessment, High Court judgment, White Coat Hypertension, documentation, medical records, nursing notes, patient comfort, tearfulness, emotional distress, pharmacological intervention.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
