Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse

Call For A Free Consultation Today | 317-505-1342

  • Home
  • About Our Firm
    • Attorney Profiles
    • Our Firm History
    • Why Choose Us?
    • Articles
    • Blogs
    • Newsletters
    • Verdicts And Settlements
  • Personal Injury
    • Car Accidents
    • Truck Accidents
    • Catastrophic Injuries
    • Dog Bites
    • Medical Malpractice
    • Premises Liability
    • Product Liability
    • Wrongful Death
    • More Practice Areas
  • FAQs
  • Attorney Referrals
  • Communities Served
    • Indianapolis, Indiana
    • Bloomington, Indiana
    • Columbus, Indiana
    • Fort Wayne, Indiana
    • Gary, Indiana
    • More Communities Served
  • Contact
  • Home
  • About Our Firm
    • Attorney Profiles
    • Our Firm History
    • Why Choose Us?
    • Articles
    • Blogs
    • Newsletters
    • Verdicts And Settlements
  • Personal Injury
    • Car Accidents
    • Truck Accidents
    • Catastrophic Injuries
    • Dog Bites
    • Medical Malpractice
    • Premises Liability
    • Product Liability
    • Wrongful Death
    • More Practice Areas
  • FAQs
  • Attorney Referrals
  • Communities Served
    • Indianapolis, Indiana
    • Bloomington, Indiana
    • Columbus, Indiana
    • Fort Wayne, Indiana
    • Gary, Indiana
    • More Communities Served
  • Contact
Email

CALL

Photo of John M. McLaughlin, Tony W. Patterson and Paul S. Kruse

Helping You Put Your Life Back On Track After A Serious Injury

  1. Home
  2.  ► 
  3. Medical Malpractice
  4.  ► 
  5. Infections after surgery, are they medical malpractice?

Infections after surgery, are they medical malpractice?

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Sep 21, 2009 | Medical Malpractice, Tony Patterson |

As an Indiana medical malpractice lawyer, I am regularly contacted by people who have developed infections following medical procedures. These infections can be from many types of bugs such as staph or strep. No matter what the particular infection is, these post surgical infections can have serious consequences and can be life threatening.

When thinking about these cases, it is important to remember that infections can develop from most any surgical procedure. Even when medical care providers do everything correctly, post surgical infections can still result. Therefore, just because a patient develops an infection does not mean that any of the doctors or nurses did anything wrong.

Under the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act, medical malpractice occurs when a health care provider, i.e. doctor, nurse or hospital, fails to exercise reasonable care in providing treatment. This requires providers to meet the “standard of care”. It is only when a patient can prove that the doctor or nurse did something a reasonable doctor or nurse wouldn’t have done or prove that the doctor or nurse failed to do what a reasonable doctor nurse would have done, that malpractice exists. Furthermore, the patient must prove that the doctor or nurse’s departure from the standard of care caused them harm or damage.

Because infections can result from surgeries in which healthcare providers are careful, malpractice can be difficult, but not impossible to prove in post surgical infection cases. Obviously, if the records reflect that a surgeon or nurse failed to appropriately sterilize surgical equipment prior to the procedure, malpractice could be proven. In most cases however, this cannot be proven. Therefore, the majority of cases involve examining the follow up care and the doctors recognition and diagnosis of the infection and the antibiotic therapies administered after the infection is diagnosed.

The evaluation of post operative care begins with the post surgical condition of the patient immediately following the procedure and in the days and weeks thereafter. During this post surgical period, physicians must be mindful of any red flags which might evidence the existence of an infection’s presence. These red flags can include, but are not limited to, pain, swelling, redness and fever. If a patient experiences these symptoms following a medical procedure, healthcare providers must be careful to consider infection as a cause of these symptoms. In order to screen for an infection’s presence, physicians often drain the surgical site and culture, or test, the fluid. By culturing the fluid, physicians can determine if the patient is infected, and if so, what antibiotics will work against the particular type of infection the patient has.

If a patient in fact has an infection, physicians often irrigate and debride the infection site. This simply means that the infection site is washed out with sterile solution and cleaned. By surgically cleaning the infection out and administering effective antibiotic therapies, physicians hope to rid the patient of the infection. While this is often the course of treatment for post operative infections, each case is different and all aspects of the care needs to be examined. For example, it needs to be determined if the surgeon recognized the need to culture the wound in a timely manner. It should also be determined if the surgeon should have consulted with an infectious disease doctor in treating the infection. If it is determined that a post surgical infection should have been treated differently, whether more quickly or aggressively, or that different antibiotic therapy should have been used, a patient may have a malpractice case.

While proving the doctor should have treated the infection differently is a significant step in proving a malpractice case, it is only half of the equation. Patients must also prove that the physician’s poor care caused harm to the patient. Spefically, in order for a malpractice claim to have merit, the patient must prove that some harm, over and above having the infection itself, resulted from the doctor’s mistakes. In many circumstances this can prove difficult. For example, if a patient develops a post operative infection, they will likely require prolonged antibiotics, no matter whether the doctor timely recognized the infection or not. If however, the infection is shown to have spread and cause damage during the delay, a case may exist.

In the end, determining whether a valid malpractice claim exists following the develpment of a post operative infection is very fact sensitive. Nevertheless, if patient believes he or she has an infection that should have been treated differently or more quickly, they should speak with an attorney as soon as possible to have their case reviewed.

What should you do after a crash on I-465 or I-70?

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | May 27, 2025 | Car Accidents

You're driving I-465 like you've done a hundred times before — fast, focused and trying to get somewhere. Then it happens. A sudden jolt, a loud impact, maybe the screech of tires or the crunch of metal. Everything feels disoriented for a second, but your mind starts...

The rights and duties of bicycle drivers in Indiana

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | May 15, 2025 | Bicycle Accidents

Bicycling is a beloved activity for many in Indiana, offering a means of transportation and a way to enjoy the outdoors. Still, sharing the road with motor vehicles can present significant risks. To safeguard cyclists, Indiana has various laws that address bicycle...

Costs of loss: recovering damages in child wrongful death cases

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Apr 28, 2025 | Wrongful Death

You can lose the ones you love for the most mundane reasons. A seemingly innocent meal purchased at a local grocery store can cost you more than you intended to pay. Late last year, grieving mother Shantria Weddle filed a wrongful death lawsuit. Weddle’s 12-year-old...

Modern twists on the age-old problem of distracted driving

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Mar 31, 2025 | Car Accidents

We all know texting while driving is dangerous. But have you looked around your car lately? Modern vehicles come packed with screens, buttons and alerts that can pull your attention from the road just as quickly as a phone. And outside your windows are plenty of...

What are the most common causes of car accidents in Indianapolis?

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Mar 21, 2025 | Car Accidents

Several factors consistently contribute to vehicular accidents in the Indianapolis area. Data shows the following are top causes of accidents in the area: Alcohol: Recent research conducted by Indiana University’s Public Policy institute finds that a top cause of...

What are unique factors of commercial truck accidents?

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Mar 21, 2025 | Truck Accidents

When driving on Interstate 465, I-70 or I-65 around Indianapolis, you’ve likely felt dwarfed by massive commercial trucks barreling down the highway. The sheer size disparity between your vehicle and a fully loaded semi creates potentially catastrophic consequences in...

Am I liable for a car accident on a slippery road?

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Mar 20, 2025 | Car Accidents

Heavy rain or snow can create hazardous driving situations. Wet roads can cause cars to slide or skid, making it hard to control your vehicle. Icy patches are even more dangerous, as they can be nearly invisible and cause sudden loss of traction. On snowy or rainy...

When Businesses Have a Duty to Protect Their Customers: The Foreseeable Attack

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Dec 12, 2023 | Premises Liability

On November 29, 2023, the Indiana Court of Appeals published its Opinion in Brummett v. Bailey, 23A-CT-683, slip op. Brummett is the latest case in a string of Indiana Court of Appeals decisions following the Indiana Supreme Court’s Goodwin v. Yeakle’s Sports Bar & Grill, Inc., 62 N.E.3d 384, 389 (Ind. 2016). In these cases, the courts have been grappling…

Thu v. Willis and the Necessity of Expert Medical Testimony

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Aug 28, 2023 | Car Accidents

On March 13, 2023, in a memorandum decision, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s decision for the plaintiff in a negligence complaint despite the defendant-appellant’s argument that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence that the car accident at issue was the proximate cause of his injuries. In this case, Thu v. Willis,[1] Guy Willis Sr. (“Willis”)…

Erie Insurance Exchange v. Craighead: Protecting the Purpose of Underinsured Motorist Coverage

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | May 22, 2023 | Car Accidents, Insurance, Underinsured Motorist ("UIM") Claims

In a case determined in September 2022, the Indiana Court of Appeals decided an important and common issue for injury victims when dealing with their own insurance in its opinion in Erie Insurance Exchange v. Craighead. Many drivers who are injured as a result of an underinsured motorist turn to their own underinsured motorist coverage and medical payments coverage to…

« Older Entries

Recent Posts

  • What should you do after a crash on I-465 or I-70?
  • The rights and duties of bicycle drivers in Indiana
  • Costs of loss: recovering damages in child wrongful death cases
  • Modern twists on the age-old problem of distracted driving
  • What are the most common causes of car accidents in Indianapolis?

Archives

Categories

RSS Feed

Subscribe To This Blog’s Feed

Contact Us Today

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse

Phone
317-505-1342

  • Follow

Indianapolis Law Office

251 North Illinois Street
Suite 1800
Indianapolis, IN 46204

Lebanon Law Office

225 West Main Street
PO Box 668
Lebanon, IN 46052
Chicago Law Office

One East Wacker Drive
Suite 2600
Chicago, IL 60601

Review The Firm

© 2025 Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP • All Rights Reserved

Disclaimer | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Business Development Solutions by FindLaw