GT (A Minor) v General Practitioner

The Plaintiff’s claim was for damages for personal injuries sustained by her as a consequence of receiving an injection of Kenalog (a steroid) as prophylaxix against hay fever. The Plaintiff was a patient at her GP’s medical centre and had previously received an injection on the 7th June, 2006 which apparently provided the Plaintiff with good relief against hay fever. In May 2007 she presented at the medical centre along with her mother and requested another injection as the hay fever season was approaching. Her general practitioner then delegated the administration of the injection to a registered nurse who was employed by the centre. The Plaintiff was advised to lie face down on a couch and the nurse administered the injection. When the injection was administered the Plaintiff experienced pain and suffered bleeding at the site of the injection which required plastering. Subsequent to the injection being administered a lesion began to develop on the Plaintiff’s left buttock (site of the injection) and in October, 2007 the Plaintiff re-attended the medical centre at which time atrophy at the site of the steroid injection was queried. The Plaintiff then came under the care of a dermatologist and consultant plastic surgeons and required surgery and may require further surgery in the future.

The primary allegation in this case was that the injection of Kenalog was administered negligently and incorrectly in that all or some of the contents of the injection were administered into the subcutaneous tissue rather than into the intra muscular site as a direct consequence whereof there was localised fat atrophy. In addition, the steroid affected the overlying skin causing thinning and telangiectasia (broken veins). The Plaintiff also alleged that she was not adequately informed as to the possible consequences of the steroid injection.

The case was defended in full on the basis that the nurse was adequately trained and experienced in the administration of intra muscular injections and that the injuries sustained are a recognised complication of and/or risk and/or undesirable effect associated with an intra-muscular injection of Kenalog of which the Plaintiff and her mother were informed.

The case ultimately settled shortly before the trial date and the figure was approved by the Court in the sum of €55,000 plus costs.


If you have any further queries, please contact any of the following from our medical negligence group:

02 November 2012

    Gillian and all at Augustus Cullen Law, A million thanks for a great job done. Justice for our son at last!!

    Catherine, Liam & William

    Dear Michael, A great result was achieved because of your efforts and we were truly blessed to have you on our side.

    Kathleen, Medical Negligence Client

    Dear Joice…you are and have been very professional, sympathetic and dignified in all of your dealings with us and I put that down to one simple fact. You listened.

    James, Medical Negligence Client

    Geraldine, Thank you most sincerely for all your hard work and commitment to these children.

    Freda McKittrick, Head of Barnardos Beacon Guardian Ad Litem service

    Neil is an absolute gentleman to deal with – kind, tactful and very efficient. We could not praise him highly enough. He brought us through a horrible time.

    Sean, Medical Negligence Client

    Many thanks again for a job well done. We really appreciate all your hard work and practical advice.

    Corporate client in a commercial litigation matter

    Dear Jamie, You and your team in ACL were so professional, diligent and prompt. I have recommended you and the firm, and will continue to do so

    Lorraine McCarthy

    Gus Cullen and the firm’s approach to addressing the key issues was professional, yet personal, efficient yet attentive.

    BB

    The process is a difficult one and when you deal with people who are so professional and yet genuine/real people, it makes it so much easier... so thanks a million.

    Julie

    Request a Callback