Hospitals usually escape liability for adverse drug reactions, with courts tending to shield them against implied warranty (hospitals are not merchants) or strict liability. In a case where the plaintiff alleged that sepsis resulted from the infusion of contaminated dextran, the Court ruled that the hospital was not a manufacturer of patient-care products, and therefore was not liable under strict liability or implied warranty rules (Shivers v. Good Shepherd Hospital). Similar approaches, though not universal, have been applied in injuries associated with the use of medical devices such as surgical needles, pacemakers, and spinal implants.
Dr. Tan is an emeritus professor at the University of Hawaii, Honolulu. This article is meant to be educational and does not constitute medical, ethical, or legal advice. It is adapted from the author’s book, "Medical Malpractice: Understanding the Law, Managing the Risk." For additional information, readers may contact the author at siang@hawaii.edu. This column, Law & Medicine, appears regularly in Internal Medicine News, a publication of Elsevier.