If you recall, UCLA opted to follow the left path all the way down to transcranial Doppler monitoring in conjunction with Triple-H procedures. They chose not to follow the right-hand path ending in comfort measures only. Why? Because they felt (1) the patient had promise of recovery, or (2) the patient was a good specimen. Or else, did they feel that there was absolutely no vital brain destruction?
At 21 days after the commencement of vasospasms, only two weeks after the UCLA physicians stated to the family that under the circumstance of this patient's injury, it is too soon to tell, meaning any medical prognosis, the patient's care was almost immediately downgraded to comfort measures only. The question I raise, from purely a medical point of view, what occurred in this period, say during the period of vasospasms, causing a 180 degree reversal of actual patient care and treatment of her initial injury. What condition or event in this time period caused the doctors and surgeons to negate initiated non-comfort measure care, when it is too soon to tell?
One thought is that this patient may have suffer from deadly, serious and debilitating strokes, though the transcranial Doppler records show that she had the usual, if not less than normal for her Grade SAH, and not that severe. So why the change of heart gentlemen? I know that you or an associate is reading this, so what's the answer? Are you going to tell the students of the future not to do this sort of thing?
Another question children, you may wish to pursue are the non-event records of CRIs and MRIs, in the critical intent to post-evaluate this patient to determine the extent of damage if any.
Is there a conspiracy being doctors and hospital in this regard? It's known that this patients newly assigned and somewhat bogus Dr. Chew, as Max-practitioner, told no one about the patient's astounding recovery from, as the UCLA neuro-physician said, 100% irreversible brain stem damage on the right and 75% irreversible brain stem damage on the left.
At the time, there were many involved, from the UC Regents, Freeman Hospital, Prairie Group, plus a sundry physician and administrators from Aetna to Maxicare, CareAmerica, and finally Blue Shield. Blue Cross almost made it on the list too, except they didn't ended up not purchasing the plan my wife was on.