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.”
词汇：
ward n.病房
vein n.血管
thrombosis n.血栓
clot n.凝块
maintenance n.维修，维护
Fragmin n.法安明(又名片段化蛋白)
staff n.员工;职工
consultant n.顾问，咨询，会诊医师
surgeon n.心血管外科顾问
knee n.膝盖
embolism n.栓塞;栓塞形成
verdict n.裁决
misadventure n.灾难，不幸遭遇，意外事故
sympathy n.同情
注释：
1.be treated with...被用......药物进行治疗
2.be admitted to...被收容至，被移送至(本文中是 医学.全.在线整.理.搜集“被送至病房”)
练习：
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
答案与题解：
1.A 从文中第二段的第一句话可以看出，病人是因为感觉右脚胀痛而去医院的(a swollen right foot)，而从文章第二段的第三行最后一句话(However, hospital staff...)可以看出他是被医院容留住院了，只不过是去错了病房。
2.B 从文章第二段第三行最后一句话可以看出，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，从第二段第四行整句话可以看出，病人在骨科病房被观察了两日后才被转送进行心血管诊断。
3.A 本题答题线索有两点，首先在文章第二段的第二行第二句话中提到了病人本应该被给予法安明这种药物进行治疗的，should have done有“本应做却没有做”的意思，后面第三句话中however这个转折词也进一步说明了这一点。其次是从第四、五段中对法安明这种药物进行介绍时可看出，病人并没有及时被给予正确的药物治疗。
4.B 文章第三段进行了介绍，即手术是11月10号进行的，而本段最后一句话说明病人在11月16号因大脑创伤而死亡，故不正确。
5.A 文章第三段中最后一句话说明了在饱受脑创伤折磨后，病人于11月16号在医院中死亡。
6.B 从文章的第一段第一句话就可以判断出，病人是由于医院的失误而致死的(a hospital error left a dying man...)，并非意外致死。
7.C 文章中的第六段讲到，Newbold一家的律师转达了其希望医院从这次事故中汲取教训，从而使更多其他家庭免遭类似的不幸,但是并没有说起律师不合格这样的信息。
