Dr David Kleiman Public Reprimand for Malpractice

Opinions, advice, statements, offers, or other information or content made available through the complaint site ShamScam are those of their respective authors and not of ShamScam, and should not necessarily be relied upon. Such authors are solely responsible for the accuracy of such content. ShamScam does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information on ShamScam and neither adopts nor endorses nor is responsible for the accuracy or reliability of any opinion, advice or statement made. Under no circumstances will ShamScam be responsible for any loss or damage resulting from anyone's reliance on information or other content posted on ShamScam.

Navigation: Main page

Author: Earl Dobson

2. Respondent is certified by the American Board of Medical Specialties in ophthalmology.

3. Respondent is forty-six (46) years of age.

4. Respondent has been licensed to practice by the Board for approximately twenty (20) years.

5. In 1988, Responded failed to obtain an x-ray in regard to patient N.Y. to detect the possibility of a foreign metal object.

6. Patient N.Y. had faint evidence of rust at the time Respondent performed the initial examination, but elected not to perform an x-ray given the quietness of the eye. Respondent's index of suspicion was also low given the lapse of time between the injury and the time of his examination 5 days later after evaluation by a previous physician.

7. Patient R.B. was examined by Respondent for trauma associated with a pencil strike to the eye.

8. Respondent administered a retrobulbar anesthesia by injection on patient R.B. that resulted in orbital hemorrhage and severe damage to the eye.

9. Respondent was aware at the time of examination that patient R.B. had a possible paternal history of Von Willebrand's disease. Given his concern for the risk of infection however, and the fact that the patient's father had two previous surgeries without complications, Respondent proceeded with the retrobulbar anesthesia prior to initiating clotting factor studies.

10. Respondent failed to assemble properly the equipment to perform a laser keratotomy and the resulting procedure on patient M.M. resulted in a corneal laceration and visual damage.

11. Respondent admits the improper assembly was the result of being tired and overworked.

You cand find all the documents here : http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/dr-david-kleiman-c314265.html

Site owners not responsible for the information posted on website.