Steroid Injection Overdose by "Pain Clinic Doctor"  Causes Auto Immune Syndrome

The following excerpt from a Notice of Intent to File Claim, or more commonly called "Notice of Intent to Sue," is a recent case that the litigators at Erlich, Rosen, Bartnick & Cook, P.C., have begun on behalf of one of our clients.  If you wish to discuss a medical malpractice claim please contact ERBC at either www.ERBClaw.com or 1-800-595-0506 for a free consultation.

Plaintiff, currently age 41, suffered from low back pain and was given the recommendation to go to a pain clinic for treatment per her primary care physician.  Plaintiff presented to Defendant doctor at his advertised pain clinic in June of 2008.  Defendant reviewed Plaintiff’s recently performed MRI scans, diagnosed her with scar tissue and arthritis, and indicated to her "I can fix this".   Defendant, who is not a trained radiologist, disagreed with the radiological interpretation that Plaintiff was suffering from a herniated disc, and instead believed she had scar tissue and an arthritic condition.

Defendant’s treatment regimen consisted of injecting plaintiff with corticosteroids, predominantly 40 mg Kenalog injections, at the L-4/L-5 disc space.  Between June 2, 2008 and October 10, 2008, a time frame of only four months, Defendant performed 9 separate corticosteroid injection procedures upon Plaintiff.  Defendant’s medical records, which are suspect since they utilize a generic "form" procedure note prepared far in advanced and apparently used all for patients, seem to indicate that Plaintiff was injected with 40 mg of Kenalog on each of the 9 occasions she went to the pain clinic from 6/2/08 to 10/10/08.   No medication administration record specific for Plaintiff is found within Defendant’s chart, therefore it can only be assumed that the generic pre-typed form procedure notes indicating 40mg of Kenalog were utilized each time is accurate. 

After Plaintiff had undergone several of the injections, her toes went numb bilaterally.  Defendant assured her this was not an issue and stated "Don’t worry about it".  One month later after additional steroid injections, her left thigh went numb from her knee to her hip.  Following the October 10, 2008 injection, Plaintiff’s pain and numbness increased and she stopped seeing Defendant doctor.  Plaintiff contacted the licensing board and was informed that Defendant had not been certified as a pain management specialist and according to the licensing board representative, Defendant was practicing outside his scope of practice.

Plaintiff was hospitalized for an infection following the second corticosteroid procedure and subsequently has developed high blood pressure requiring medication.  Furthermore, she has been diagnosed with an auto immune process that was proximately caused by the massive overuse of steroid injections by Defendant doctor. Plaintiff has also had to undergo disc fusion surgery in her lumbar spine by a neurosurgeon to stabilize the area where Defendant injected her with massive doses of steroids.  

As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s failure to take a proper history, order the appropriate diagnostic testing, and his ignoring the radiological interpretation of Plaintiff’s prior MRI studies, he negligently determined that her low back pain complaints were related to scar tissue and arthritic conditions as opposed to a herniated disc.   His negligent diagnosis of scar tissue and arthritic changes versus a herniated disc proximately resulted in his failing to refer Plaintiff to a neurosurgeon or orthopedic spinal surgeon for evaluation and instead proximately resulted in his making the negligent medical decision to treat Plaintiff with corticosteroid injections.

Defendant’s failure to inform Plaintiff that he was neither trained  nor board certified in either pain management or anesthesiology, but rather had a general surgery background, resulted in Plaintiff having the mistaken belief that Defendant was qualified to care and treat her as a pain management specialist and therefore acquiesced to his care and treatment. Defendant’s negligent failure to inform Plaintiff that the corticosteroid treatment modality he chose for her had substantial risk and side effects led her to acquiesce to his care and treatment without being properly informed of the risks and side effects of corticosteroid treatment. Furthermore, as a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s negligence in failing to properly inform Plaintiff that his use of corticosteroids for her care and treatment was well outside the standard of care for the amount and duration of time a patient should be subjected to corticosteroids over a one year period  resulted in Plaintiff being unaware that Defendant was overmedicating and overdosing her on corticosteroids and therefore, she did not provide informed consent to place herself at risk for the side effects of his treatment plan.

The massive overdose of corticosteroids over a short four month time span by Defendant resulted in Plaintiff experiencing many of the known side effects and adverse reactions to excessive amounts of corticosteroids. As a result of the excessive amounts of corticosteroids injected into her system by Defendant, Plaintiff developed neurological changes, pain, and autoimmune deficiencies which have resulted in pain, tissue, nerve and joint damage, numbness, loss of feeling, and the need for ongoing medical care and treatment for her auto immune deficiency, all of which are permanent in nature.

Verdicts and Settlements

Some of our noteworthy personal injury case results include:

  • Birth Trauma Causing Cerebral Palsy: $3,800,000.00
  • Birth Trauma: $3,500,000.00
  • Fall from Gurney in Hospital Causing Cervical Fracture and Paralysis: $3,500,000.00
  • Child Electrocution: $1,600,000.00
  • Wrongful Death Following Child Birth: $2,025,000.00
  • Automobile Negligence Resulting in Permanent Damage/Disability: $1,365,000.00

More>>

Law Offices of
Erlich Rosen Bartnick & Cook
29201 Telegraph Road, Suite 330
Southfield, Michigan 48034
Toll Free: 800-595-0506

AV Peer Review Rated

LexisNexisThis web site is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. [ Site Map ]