Assignment task: Mr. C., a patient several days postoperative following open heart surgery, was still in the cardiac critical care unit when it was discovered that he had developed a pressure blister on the back of his neck and a Stage 1 decubitus ulcer on his coccyx. Following discharge from the acute care facility, he entered a second hospital where he underwent surgery for the sacral pressure ulcer. He subsequently sued the primary acute care facility for negligence allegedly committed by the critical care nurses and obtained a $300,000 jury verdict in his favor. Mr. C.'s nursing expert witness testified about routine skin assessment and care for patients in general; her professional background did not include the care of critically ill patients. The primary care facility challenged the verdict, noting that the patient's expert witness was not a critical care nurse nor had she ever worked with critically ill patients.
Questions:
Q1. Was an expert witness needed for the jury to understand the issues being tried?
Q2. Did the fact that the nursing expert witness had never cared for critical care patients alter the appropriateness or significance of her testimony?
Q3. If it was determined that only an expert witness with critical care expertise should have testified in this case, what reasonable rationale can you give for such a determination?
Q4. How would you decide the appeal?