These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
68 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2727301)
1. Surgical sponges: "delegated responsibility" issue. Case in point: Ravi v. Williams (536 So. 2d 1374--AL (1988)). Tammelleo AD Regan Rep Nurs Law; 1989 Apr; 29(11):2. PubMed ID: 2727301 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Who has responsibility to monitor O.R. blood loss? Case in point: Uhr v. Lutheran General Hospital (589 N.E.2d 723--IL [1992]). Tammelleo AD Regan Rep Nurs Law; 1992 Sep; 33(4):2. PubMed ID: 1410393 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Surgical sponge found 14 yrs, later: nurses sued. Case in point: Melendez v. Beal (683 S.W. 2d 869--TK). Tammelleo AD Regan Rep Nurs Law; 1985 Apr; 25(11):4. PubMed ID: 3846312 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Nurse and the law. More on foreign bodies. Langslow A Aust Nurses J; 1992 Jul; 22(1):30-3. PubMed ID: 1530525 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Lap pad left in patient: is nurse or doctor responsible? Case in point: Ravi v. Coates 662 So. 2d 218-AL (1995). Tammelleo AD Regan Rep Nurs Law; 1996 Jan; 36(8):2. PubMed ID: 8711123 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Can doctors rely on nurses' sponge counts? Case in point: Van Hook v. Anderson (824 P. 2d 509--WA (1992)). Tammelleo AD Regan Rep Nurs Law; 1992 Apr; 32(11):2. PubMed ID: 1603936 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Surgical towel left in pt.: were nurses responsible? Case on point: Hodesh v. Korlitz, 2008-Ohio-2052 (05/02/2008) -OH. Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2008 Jun; 49(1):2. PubMed ID: 18686888 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. O.R. nurses: important trial witnesses. Case in point: Stevens v. Union Memorial Hospital (424 A. 2d 1118 - MD.). Regan WA Regan Rep Nurs Law; 1981 Apr; 21(11):4. PubMed ID: 6908732 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Caveat for nurse-inventors: legal issues. Case in point: Tate v. Scanlan International, Inc. (402 N.W. 2d 66-MN). Tammelleo AD Regan Rep Nurs Law; 1987 Jun; 28(1):2. PubMed ID: 3648830 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Gauze pad left in pt. during reversal of tubal ligation surgery. Case on point: Houserman v. Garrett, 2004 WL 2829112. Nurs Law Regan Rep; 2004 Dec; 45(7):4. PubMed ID: 15675762 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. 6 1/2 inch scissor clamp left in patient. Case in point: Fox v. Oklahoma Memorial Hosp. (774 P. 2d 459--OK (1989)). Tammalleo AD Regan Rep Nurs Law; 1989 Sep; 30(4):4. PubMed ID: 2594978 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Nurse refused to assist in abortion: demoted! Case in point: Kenny v. Ambulatory Centre of Miami (400 So. 2d 1262 - FLA.). Regan WA Regan Rep Nurs Law; 1981 Nov; 22(6):4. PubMed ID: 6914689 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. O.R. nurse testifies as "expert" re negligence of O.R. tech. Case on point: Healthtrust, Inc. v. Cantrell 689 So. 2d 822--AL (1997). Tammelleo AD Regan Rep Nurs Law; 1997 May; 37(12):2. PubMed ID: 9277269 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]