A former surgery technician at Rose Medical Center in Denver and Audubon Ambulatory Surgery Center in Colorado is being investigated for potentially exposing thousands of patients to hepatitis C — a chronic, blood-borne disease. Kristen Diane Parker is being criminally charged for allegedly trading her contaminated syringes of saline for ones filled with Fentanyl, a powerful narcotic. If convicted of consumer product tampering and other charges, Parker could receive up to 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000.

Parker was an employee at Rose Medical Center from October 2008 to April 2009, and later at the Audubon Ambulatory Surgery Center from May to July 2009. Nine reported cases of hepatitis C have been acknowledged by Rose Medical Center, though Parker is believed to have exposed more than 6,000 patients to the chronic disease.

Hepatitis C is an incurable disease that could lead to severe liver damage, as well as cirrhosis. Some of the symptoms of the disease include nausea, diarrhea, fatigue, pain and jaundice. Patients who have received help at these medical centers and demonstrate the aforementioned symptoms should seek immediate medical attention and be tested for hepatitis C.

Receiving Compensation for Hepatitis Exposure

Patients who have contracted hepatitis C while receiving medical treatment at Rose Medical Center or Audubon Ambulatory Surgery Center should contact one of the skilled attorneys of Aylstock, Witkin, Kreis and Overholtz. They can help you build a strong case against these medical centers and award you compensatory damages to offset the costs of expensive medical bills, lost income and emotional distress.

To learn more about filing a hepatitis exposure lawsuit, contact AWKO Law today at (888) 255-2956.

In another amazing story detailing the extent that medical device manufacturers are willing to go to put profits over safety, a Washington man, and his attorneys have successfully exposed a company that put millions of patients lives at risk, and defraided thousands of hospitals, by failing to disclose known risks with it heart surgery devices.

A Washington state jury awarded 40.1 million in damages to a man who needed a heart transplant after his heart was scarred, singed and burned by a malfunction involving a defective Edwards monitor and catheter.

According to the AP report, Mr. Singh had gone to Providence Everett Medical Center in October 2004 for heart bypass surgery , and the doctors used the monitor, and had placed several attached cathetrs in the man’s heart. When the physician could not remove the catheter, he pulled back some of the tissue which revealed that the catheter had overheated and burned his heart.
The doctor could not restart Singh’s heart, so he was transferred him to another hospital while his circulation was maintained with a mechanical heart pump. The patient was in a chemically induced coma until he received a a transplant several weeks later.

According to the report, the hospital blamed Edwards for failing to disclose a problem with the monitor. The company was even pordered to pay the hospital $310,000 for fraud.

According to a press release from the man’s attorneys:

According to court documents, Edwards first became aware of a software bug in its monitors back in 1998, but ignored internal recommendations to correct the problem. In 2002, the software bug caused a similar incident in Japan — caught on video tape — but the smoldering catheter had been removed from the patient before overheating.

Despite the Japan incident, Edwards did not warn or advise healthcare professionals to stop using its monitors, court records show. Instead, the company simply began distributing re-designed products in March 2003 that no longer contained the software error.

The jury awarded Singh $24 million, his wife $6 million and their children $750,000, $500,000 and $500,000 respectively.

Even after this incident occurred, Edward continued to put profits over safety, and continued to deny any problem with the monitor and did not warn other hospitals. It took another two years for the company to finally issue a recall.