Page Section: Breadcrumbs
you are here:
Home
> Decisions & Case Notes > Case Notes > Failure to arrange hospital admission for post-partum woman with hypertension, who later suffered eclamptic seizures (03HDC15081)
Page Section: Left Content Column
Page Section: Centre Content Column
Failure to arrange hospital admission for post-partum woman with hypertension, who later suffered eclamptic seizures (03HDC15081)
Download Failure to arrange hospital admission for post-partum woman with hypertension, who later suffered eclamptic seizures (03HDC15081) (PDF 152Kb)
(03HDC15081, 24 March 2005)
Midwife ~ Lead maternity carer ~ Obstetrician ~ District
health board ~ Hypertension ~ Headache ~ Assessment ~ Monitoring ~
Consultation with specialist ~ Communication ~ Referral ~ Rural
practice ~ Standard of care ~ Professional standards ~ Vicarious
liability ~ Rights 4(1), 4(2), 4(5)
A 22-year-old woman complained about the care provided by her
midwife after the delivery of her baby. Seven days after the
delivery, the woman told her midwife that she had a persistent
headache, which had not abated despite taking pain relief. The
midwife took the woman's blood pressure, which was elevated at
200/120. She told the woman to rest, and an hour later her blood
pressure had dropped to 180/110, which was still high. The midwife
consulted with another midwife and arranged for an urgent full
blood count to assess renal and liver function. The midwife stayed
with the woman until the test results arrived. Although the results
were within the normal range, the midwife remained concerned. She
took another reading (190/80) and decided to seek specialist
advice.
The hospital's on-call obstetrician was due in theatre for an
emergency procedure and asked the midwife to call back in half an
hour. There is some disparity between the parties as to what
information was relayed to the obstetrician. The midwife says she
told the obstetrician of the woman's blood pressure recordings,
blood test results, headaches and negative proteinuria. The
obstetrician does not recall the headaches being mentioned; the
midwife's notes refer only to the blood pressure. The obstetrician
says that either he failed to appreciate the severity of the
hypertension or it was not communicated accurately to him. He
suggested bed rest overnight, agreed to the midwife giving the
woman a sedative, and instructed the midwife to assess the woman's
blood pressure and clinical condition in the morning. The next
morning the woman began to have seizures.
It was held that the midwife's duty of care went beyond
identifying and communicating causes for concern. As lead maternity
carer (LMC), she was ultimately responsible for the woman's care,
and should have insisted upon the woman's admission to hospital. By
not doing so, she breached Rights 4(1) and 4(2).
The midwife was also ultimately responsible for making sure the
obstetrician received adequate information about the woman's
condition and that this was communicated clearly. This is
especially important when advice is sought over the telephone, as
the doctor is not able to conduct an examination. Regardless of
what was actually said, the misunderstanding indicates that this
standard was not met, and the midwife was held to have breached
Right 4(5) by failing to ensure that quality and continuity of care
was maintained.
Page Section: Right Content Column
Top of Page