Lumbar Puncture Negligence Review
Budget: $250 – $750 USD
I require a detailed, evidence-based review of a single lumbar puncture case in which the execution of the procedure is in question. The records show an improper technique was used and that the overall diagnosis was delayed. Patient verbalized that neurosurgeon in past suggested a lumbar puncture should always be done on fluoroscopy secondary to expected connective tissue disease. Patient had history of partial transverse myelitis with left sided weakness. Since lumbar puncture significant bowel dysfunction on right side, right sided weakness, severe pain secondary to constipation and diagnosed with PTSD from medical trauma with moral injury. Patient had unequal pupils, and hematoma in the days following lumbar puncture. Neurologist who ordered the lumbar puncture, dismissing the request for procedure to be done under fluoroscopy said on phone to patient "maybe you got some medication in your eye". Dismissive care from this procedure and the hospital neurology department has led to PTSD with moral injury and continued right sided bowel dysfunction requiring pelvic floor PT for over 2 years, Botox to pelvic floor and severe pain and suffering. Provider also dismissed neuroinflammation ( other providers treated) which led to delayed treatment and suffering. Closing pressure not done even when knowing risk of Arnold Chiari 0
Your analysis should:
• Examine the procedure step-by-step, comparing what was documented against current standards of care and accepted clinical guidelines for lumbar puncture execution.
• Identify every instance where technique, anesthesia choice, sterility, patient positioning, or needle selection deviated from best practice.
• Map a clear timeline that highlights how the delayed diagnosis interacted with the procedure errors and contributed to the outcome.
• Cite authoritative references (peer-reviewed journals, specialty society guidelines, hospital policies) to substantiate each finding.
• Conclude with a concise, courtroom-ready summary—breach, causation, and foreseeable harm—formatted in approximately 2–3 pages, plus a supporting appendix of cited sources.
Electronic medical records, imaging, and nursing notes will be provided in PDF. Deliver the report in Word or PDF, with tracked-change comments welcome for transparency.
Your analysis should:
• Examine the procedure step-by-step, comparing what was documented against current standards of care and accepted clinical guidelines for lumbar puncture execution.
• Identify every instance where technique, anesthesia choice, sterility, patient positioning, or needle selection deviated from best practice.
• Map a clear timeline that highlights how the delayed diagnosis interacted with the procedure errors and contributed to the outcome.
• Cite authoritative references (peer-reviewed journals, specialty society guidelines, hospital policies) to substantiate each finding.
• Conclude with a concise, courtroom-ready summary—breach, causation, and foreseeable harm—formatted in approximately 2–3 pages, plus a supporting appendix of cited sources.
Electronic medical records, imaging, and nursing notes will be provided in PDF. Deliver the report in Word or PDF, with tracked-change comments welcome for transparency.