Dragged From My Archives

I dragged this post up so that people can see the lies, untruths, and the big question, WHO THE HELL PERFORMED MY SURGERY!!!??? Here's the link; No Midazolam: Pleasant woman in No Distress

Here's a copy of the document;Intraoperative+report+013.jpg (image)

1) We start right out with a falsehood. I don't know how many times I have to repeat the same thing over and over before medical people understand... I-DID-NOT-FALL-OFF-A-HORSE-WITH-MY-ARM-OUTSTRETCHED!!! It never happened. How many hundreds of times do I need to be ejected from the saddle to know that we DON'T extend our arms? I got KNOCKED DOWN, as in near the horse, not on it! I got spun through the air with my arms pulled into my chest so as not to break them. When I rolled across the ground (with force) over my arm, it was caught with the palm outward and the back of the hand against the chest. This is what broke my arm. I HEARD IT SNAP! Try this yourself and see how this could happen. Nobody LISTENED to me!

Moving down to the part where it says 'general condition:' See where it says "no distress?" This is true, I wasn't in any distress. I was calm. I was relaxed. I was glad to be having my arm fixed. (little did *I* know what was going to happen) I trusted these people... How could I possible know that my nasty little crna was going to write elsewhere that I had "anxiety" and do every single thing I had instructed him not to? Amazing isn't it? Each medical person writes whatever they want on these documents to make themselves look good, or to justify their actions.

Now look farther down the page to where it says 'extremities:' "Edema, ecchy, a circled L, and then a total LIE! Nowhere else on any document anywhere is my arm described as it is here; sig. deformity!(?) Every other document I have says the opposite. NO deformity. There was no deformity other than swelling and even that is described elsewhere as "moderate swelling." Apparently the PA has been instructed to put this crap down as justification. I am even suspicious of the "ecchy" (ecchymosis; bruising that generally occurs with aging skin when bumped or pulled) designation. There was no discoloration or bruising, so I'm wondering where this came from? Is this just what everybody puts down for a broken arm? Was this guy looking at another patient?

Here's the million dollar question in light of the terrible job somebody did on my arm; Whose signature is on the line at the bottom? That's right, it's the PA whom I suspect did the surgery. My surgeons illegible initials are on that line as well... Why? The PA time stamped this document, but the initials are not timed. So what time did my surgeon get there? Never?

Final thing about just this one single sheet of paper, look at the time! 10:00! My surgery was supposed to start well before this! So why did the writer of the report put the time at 10:00? I was drugged well before 10:00 and I talked to this person before I was drugged. What's up with the odd timing of this?



This is just the kind of sloppy record keeping that makes one angry and suspicious. Just one single document and so many errors.