Dermatology Affiliates complaint alleges improper informed consent before an IPL laser burned a patient’s chest
The complaint alleges that a dermatologist at Dermatology Affiliates diagnosed a patient with actinic damage during a February 1, 2022 skin exam. She recommended IPL laser treatment to the patient’s chest. Proper informed consent was not obtained, and no alternative treatments were discussed. A medical aesthetician performed the laser treatment on February 21, 2022, and it caused painful burns that developed into blisters. The patient made repeated attempts to be seen afterward. She was not examined by the dermatologist again for about two and a half weeks, and then received no treatment or referral. The complaint alleges the treatment and the lack of appropriate post-procedure care left her with permanent scarring and disfigurement.
Overview
This page concerns a public complaint alleging improper informed consent at a dermatology practice before a laser treatment burned a patient’s chest.
Chronology
The complaint alleges as follows:
- On February 1, 2022 V. Rutledge Forney, M.D. examined the patient at Dermatology Affiliates for an annual skin exam. She diagnosed actinic damage and recommended IPL laser treatment to the patient’s chest.
- The practice did not obtain proper informed consent for the laser treatment or discuss alternative options with her.
- Adrianna Santiago, a licensed medical aesthetician, performed the IPL laser treatment on February 21, 2022, and it caused painful burns to the patient’s chest.
- The patient developed red, painful skin irritation that progressed to blisters. She returned to the practice several times but was not seen by Dr. Forney again until March 10, 2022.
- At the March 10, 2022 visit the patient received no treatment or referral. She went on to seek care from a plastic surgeon outside the practice.
Alleged failures
The complaint alleges the following failures:
- Santiago did not properly or safely perform the IPL laser procedure on the patient’s chest.
- The practice did not properly obtain the patient’s informed consent or discuss alternatives before the procedure.
- The practice did not provide adequate post-procedure care despite her repeated attempts to be seen.
- The filing alleges that the procedure and the lack of appropriate post-procedure care caused the patient’s burns, permanent scarring, and disfigurement.
- The complaint pleads general negligence, professional negligence, and corporate negligence. It also pleads imputed liability under respondeat superior and attaches an expert affidavit under O.C.G.A. § 9-11-9.1.