The recent victory by a Levaquin plaintiff in his lawsuit against the manufacturer of the fluroquinolone antibiotic raises an interesting sidebar.
Earlier this month John Schedin was awarded more than a million dollars by a jury, after he suffered ruptures in both his Achilles tendons three days after starting on Levaquin together with a steroid. The doctor who prescribed the duo to the then-76-year-old indicated that while he was aware of the potential for tendon complications with Levaquin, he was not aware of the increased risk to seniors when Levaquin is taken in concert with a steroid.
Schedin now has to crawl up the stairs on his hands and knees in order to get to his bed at night. His doctor is mortified at the role he played in his patient’s misfortune.
The trial featured the usual back-and-forth as to what was known and what wasn’t, what was revealed and what allegedly was not, and so on. The manufacturer (defendant) claims that all the necessary info was made available on the medication guide that came with the product. The plaintiff countered that such information—including the black box warning—was buried deep within the bowels of a document few patients will ever read anyway, let alone their busy doctors.
The doctor testified that he did not recall the manufacturer’s rep ever referencing tendon problems during her visits to the office. The sales rep, while testifying she did slip an information packet into the basket with all the free samples, did not recall either whether, or not, she had made any verbal reference to the Levaquin tendon issue.
However, she said, she may not have had time anyway. She testified that in this day and age, with high caseloads, getting to actually talk to the doctor for 30 seconds would leave her feeling ‘lucky…’
Thirty seconds?
Something is wrong here.
How can a drug company rep effectively disseminate product information to a doctor in that Read the rest of this entry »