Representing Victims of Medical Malpractice Across Ontario

Articles Tagged

Sepsis

Sepsis is a life-threatening response to infection in which the body’s immune reaction damages its own tissues and organs. It is among the most common conditions at the heart of Ontario medical malpractice claims, in part because sepsis is reversible if recognized early and devastating if it progresses to septic shock or multi-organ failure. Common allegations in sepsis cases include failure to recognize early warning signs, failure to initiate empirical antibiotics within the appropriate window, failure to obtain blood cultures and other source-identifying investigations, failure to escalate care to a higher acuity setting, and failure to manage the underlying source of infection.

The standard of care in sepsis recognition and management is informed by the international Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines and by hospital-level sepsis protocols, although both function as background only. In litigation, the actual standard is proven through expert evidence and is calibrated to the clinical setting in which the patient presented. An emergency department triage nurse is not held to the same standard as an intensive care physician, but each is held to the standard of a reasonable practitioner in their own role.

Posts tagged Sepsis analyze Ontario decisions involving missed, delayed, or mismanaged sepsis, including pediatric and post-operative presentations.

8 articles View all topics →
Navy title card reading "Ibrahimova v Cavanagh: The Court of Appeal upholds a causation finding built on inference" from paulcahill.ca

Ibrahimova v Cavanagh: The Court of Appeal Upholds a Causation Finding Built on Inference

The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismisses Dr. Cavanagh’s causation appeal in Ibrahimova v Cavanagh, upholding findings about what would have happened at a tertiary hospital the patient never reached on the relevant day. The decision confirms that a plaintiff can prove a counterfactual treatment path through a specialist from the receiving discipline, without institutional witnesses, and that a defendant who calls no expert in that specialty is unlikely to recast the resulting findings as speculation.

Read More »
Have a Case Like This?

Concerned about medical negligence?
Talk to Paul directly.

Free, confidential consultations. Paul reviews every potential case personally and tells you honestly whether it merits investigation.