Hey there, time traveller! This article was published 14/4/2018 (778 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.
For at least 20 months, the Brandon Regional Health Centre knew it was using vital breathing support machines not equipped with any alarms to signal a potentially life-threatening disconnection, and it failed to properly mitigate the risk. That’s among the findings of a confidential ombudsman report shared with the Free Press by the whistleblower who sounded the alarm.
Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure (BiPAP) machines are crucial for patients who don’t get enough oxygen when they inhale. They’re known to occasionally disconnect, sometimes from the pressure of high oxygen flow and other times if they become tangled when a patient rolls around in bed.
A third-party expert cited by the ombudsman’s office makes the risks clear: "For patients who were less oxygen dependent, this could lead to patient discomfort and shortness of breath. For patients who were very oxygen dependent, this could lead to hypoxia, respiratory distress, and eventually cardiac arrest."
Newer models are equipped with an alarm to notify staff in the event this happens, but until last year, the Brandon hospital relied on six machines it acknowledged "did not have the capacity to alarm."
The hospital’s safety measure, implemented after a patient died from a similar disconnection on another breathing machine in the summer of 2015, was "red taping." That involves sticking red tape on the oxygen line so it’s clear to all staff in the room if it disconnects. It was believed nurses could easily check it when they did their rounds every 30 minutes.
The ombudsman’s investigators concluded that measure wasn’t good enough, in part because respiratory staff told them it wasn’t an adequate safeguard. After all, for some patients, the impact would be visible within minutes.
"Increased patient supervision was an option available during that time which was not exercised," the report says.
It was never exercised. Not months later, after a fall 2015 incident, when tubing for a BiPAP machine dislodged while a patient was rolling around in bed. The patient wasn’t injured, but the staff member who wrote up the incident recommended an external alarm in case it happened again.
It wasn’t exercised after a February 2016 incident that left respiratory therapist Ian Mohammed with post-traumatic stress.
Mohammed, who worked for nearly a decade at the hospital, spurred the ombudsman’s investigation. And while he considered asking the Manitoba Labour Board to rule on whether he’d faced reprisals from the hospital as a result of speaking up, ultimately he just wants Manitobans to be made aware.
"You come to the hospital with a lot of trust," Mohammed said. "Most people understand therapy could go wrong but they reasonably expect that we will be truthful… that we will tell the risks that come with things."
Only one respiratory therapist worked the night shift at the hospital. That’s still the case now, even following a staffing review recommended by the ombudsman. "We don’t have the amount of work required for them," said Brian Schoonbaert, chief operating officer at the Brandon Regional Health Centre.
But that’s not what the therapists interviewed during the ombudsman’s investigation said. According to them, it’s a busy shift: they cover the whole hospital on their own, often foregoing charting to answer pages or field urgent calls for help. That’s how it was, Mohammed said, on the February night when he was the lone therapist at work and a patient’s BiPAP machine disconnected.
Mohammed started his shift in the emergency room around 8 p.m. He said he knew he needed to see a patient later to test her oxygen and carbon dioxide levels, but he couldn’t get away from the ER until 9 p.m. When he walked in the room, his first thought was, "why didn’t they call me for an emergency?"
The woman was lying on her hospital bed. A nurse had a mask pressed to her face but Mohammed could tell she wasn’t getting the oxygen she needed. The equipment next to her was tangled, as if she’d been struggling. Two years later, he still remembers her eyes.
"It was something I could feel," Mohammed said, "really desperate."
He scanned the equipment line, leaning in close until he could hear the telltale hiss of the disconnect. Mohammed reconnected the line and the oxygen flowed. The next day, shaken, he asked for a meeting with his supervisor. He told her he didn’t want to put the machine on someone again, that he wouldn’t.
Mohammed told the Free Press he specifically asked for the right to refuse work he believed to be unsafe. He alleges his supervisor refused.
In a statement released in response to questions about the allegations, Schoonbaert said "staff always have the right under Workplace Safety and Health legislation to refuse dangerous work and if there was a concern, the employee could raise it under that premise."
Mohammed kept working. He said he did his best to avoid having to use the BiPAP machine and continued to push for meetings with his superiors.
After one tense meeting in May 2016, Mohammed broke down and wrote to the hospital’s patient safety and quality improvement co-ordinator.
"I told her that I almost killed someone," he said. "I get the feeling that I might be asked to do it again."
He wrote a letter to Health Minister Kelvin Goertzen. He told the minister that he had watched a patient suffocating, watched a novice nurse holding the mask to the woman’s face without realizing the machine had disconnected. "Why is there no money?" Mohammed asked. "How are these machines acceptable to any management?"
The hospital started requesting funding to replace its BiPAP machines, which ranged in age from six to 25 years old, in 2013-14. In total, it asked for funding for four consecutive years. Because BiPAPs are considered basic equipment, funding requests are considered at the regional level, not the provincial level. Asked about safeguards in cases such as this, a spokeswoman for Manitoba Health said the region is "responsible for clinical services delivery and planning, as well as determining the priority of within region risks, risk planning and mitigation."
In February 2016, funding to replace the machines came through although there were further delays, according to the ombudsman’s report, when the funding was "identified to be insufficient to cover the cost of the desired safety features." (The approximate cost for a basic machine is $4,000.)
That meant new machines weren’t in circulation until February 2017. Mohammed said he thought that was an unconscionable delay given the circumstances. Schoonbaert said it’s not just about respiratory therapy, but "a matter of trying to balance all the needs within the entire region."
Mohammed spent most of 2016 on mental health leave, going home to New Brunswick to deal with post-traumatic stress.
He tried once to return to work in August, but there were no new machines yet and hospital staffing protocol remained the same.
"There was no change," Mohammed said, "I had the same concerns."
It was during that trip back to Brandon that Mohammed wrote down his concerns and filed them, formally, with the ombudsman’s office.
Mohammed said the investigation was a relief and he felt vindicated. The investigation also revealed a disconnect between the hospital’s respiratory therapists and management.
"We have had no problems with machines to a large extent," said Schoonbaert, who wanted it made clear that the patient who died in 2015 was using a Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) machine, not a BiPAP.
"Any of the staff who knew of this incident were very much aware that it was a patient’s private CPAP machine from their home," he said. "It was a very unfortunate event but it was a very different scenario."
However, the ombudsman report says that many respiratory therapists seemed to be under the impression that the person died while using one of the six BiPAP machines.
"(Respiratory therapists) believed that a patient died using an unalarmed BiPAP unit, and this event did not lead to either the units being replaced or any enhanced patient supervision," the report says. Regardless, the report says, the circumstances of the patient’s death should have been enough to alert the hospital to the risk of using unalarmed machines, BiPAP or otherwise.
In that case, the patient’s CPAP machine became disconnected, cutting off the oxygen source. There was no alarm and by the time the patient was found, he or she was "unresponsive, without breathing or a pulse." The person died a short time later. The hospital’s response was to make sure all machines were on the same side of the beds as the oxygen source to minimize the risk of entanglement and introduce "red taping." The response did not include increased supervision.
The next documented incidents were tubing dislodgement in 2015 and Mohammed’s patient in February 2016, although the ombudsman says there’s a dearth of charting about disconnections, making it impossible to evaluate the frequency with which they occurred.
The report says respiratory therapists considered the disconnections to be "a weak point" within their unit — one that irregular, non-mandatory staff meetings failed to address. Each therapist interviewed had either experienced a disconnection with one of their patients or had heard about a colleague’s disconnection. One person said they happened at least once a year, while several more said they happened "every few months or even more frequently." Had incident reports been filed, the ombudsman says, problems with the machines might have been properly addressed and there might not have been a "sustained" risk to patients.
The latest updates on the novel coronavirus and COVID-19.
The new BiPAP machines were installed in February 2017 and Mohammed was supposed to start on a gradual return to work in April. It lasted less than one morning, he said.
He had heard from former colleagues about an incident in which one of the new machines disconnected without sounding an alarm because a staff member hadn’t been properly trained on how to operate it. He wanted to ask about that, Mohammed said, but instead the conversation became heated, and ended. He alleges he was fired and escorted out of the building by security. The health authority disputes that.
"We can confirm that no one was fired," Schoonbaert said, but "specifics of personnel issues will not be discussed publicly."
He went on to say the health authority considers "the case closed." Mohammed, knowing there is still only one respiratory therapist making the rounds at night, does not.
The Public Interested Disclosure (Whistleblower Protection) Act
When it was proclaimed: April 2, 2007
It’s purpose: PIDA is meant to ensure government employees have a safe way to disclose significant and serious wrongdoing in the public service. It is also meant to protect them from reprisal during the process. However, you do not have to be an employee to make a disclosure.
What does PIDA apply to? Right now, government employees can disclose allegations under PIDA when they concern: provincial government departments, Crown corporations, boards and commissions, child and family services authorities and agencies, regional health authorities, hospitals, personal care homes, universities, colleges, independent offices of the Legislative Assembly, a select number of other organizations that have their operating costs funded at least 50 per cent by the government.
What the ombudsman considers a wrongdoing: an act or omission that is an offence under another law, an act or omission that creates a specific and substantial danger to the life, health or safety of persons or the environment, and gross mismanagement, including mismanagement of public funds or a public asset. Per PIDA, a wrongdoing also includes “knowingly directing or counselling a person to commit a wrongdoing.”
PIDA by the numbers:
2017 — Wrongdoing was found in two cases (including the Brandon BiPAP case) and the ombudsman’s office made recommendations in seven cases. More complete information will be released in a few months along with the ombudsman’s annual report.2016 — 23 disclosures, four investigations launched, four investigations finalized with no findings of wrongdoing (recommendations were made).2015 — 18 disclosures, three investigations launched, three investigations finalized with no findings of wrongdoing.2014 — 16 disclosures, 11 investigations launched, no investigations were finalized.2013 — 47 disclosures, 16 investigations launched, and one case resolved without investigation and with no findings of wrongdoing.Note that prior to 2013, the ombudsman’s office tracked investigations, reports and recommendations by disclosure rather than case file. That means that when the office says it made two recommendations those may pertain to the same allegations.2012 — five investigations were opened and wrongdoing was found in one case relating to a personal care home in Winnipeg.2011 — One investigation was opened and recommendations were made in once case, although there were no findings of wrongdoing.2010 — Eight investigations were opened, one was carried forward from the previous year, and while there were no findings of wrongdoing, the ombudsman made a series of recommendations for change to Manitoba Health.2009 — 12 inquiries were made to the PIDA team but no investigations were warranted. One investigation was carried forward from the previous year. There were no findings of wrongdoing.2008 — Three investigations were opened and one investigation was carried forward from the previous year. There were no findings of wrongdoing.2007 — One investigation was opened but not completed by the end of the year.Whistleblower consequences: PIDA is meant to protect whistleblowers from reprisal but that isn't always possible. Currently the Manitoba Labour Board is tasked with investigating if someone alleges reprisals. According to their records, the Labour Board has investigated nine such complaints. Five were dismissed, two were withdrawn, and two are currently pending.
What’s next? In December, Finance Minister Cameron Friesen introduced Bill 5, which seeks to amend PIDA. If passed, the bill would extend whistleblower protection to school divisions and interested municipalities. It would also strengthen safeguards for those who come forward, giving the ombudsman the power to investigate complaints about reprisals against whistleblowers.
—source: Office of the Manitoba Ombudsman
A timeline of the investigation into BiPAP machines at Brandon Regional Health Centre
Note: The ombudsman’s office found a significant lack of charting about disconnection incidents, so while these are the documented incidents, they are not believed to be a comprehensive list.
• August 2013 – a patient’s oxygen tubing became knotted, but there was no injury to the patient.
• Summer 2015 – a patient using a CPAP machine brought from home died after it became disconnected. It was a disconnection issue similar to the BiPAP disconnections. For a long time, according to the ombudsman’s investigation, the hospital’s respiratory therapists believed the patient died while using an unalarmed BiPAP machine.
• September 2015 – BiPAP tubing dislodged from a machine, the person who writes up the incident recommends an external alarm. There was no injury, but BRHC’s followup was to request new machines.
• August 2016 – the office of the Manitoba Ombudsman receives a disclosure of alleged wrongdoings concerning the BiPAP machines.
• September 21, 2016 – the Patient Safety office at Brandon Regional Health Centre tells the ombudsman that it has six BiPAP machines in circulation “that have the potential to disconnect or fail… (and) do not have the capacity to alarm.”
• February 2016 – a patient’s BiPAP machine becomes disconnected while respiratory therapist Ian Mohammed is on shift. The patient is ultimately fine, but the incident traumatizes Mohammed.
• February 2016 – funding for six new, alarmed units is approved, but it will be another year before they are fully installed.
• Spring 2016 – Mohammed avoids using the BiPAP machines, he raises concerns with his superiors and alleges he was denied the right to refuse what he believed to be unsafe work.
• May 2016 – Mohammed takes a summer leave to deal with stress arising from the February 2016 incident.
• June 2016 – the patient safety office at the Brandon hospital informs Mohammed via letter that funding has finally been approved and the new machines are expected to be in place by fall.
• August 2016 – Mohammed tries to return to work but doesn’t feel well enough. Still concerned about what he sees as the hospital’s failure to mitigate the risk to patient safety while they await the new machines, he files a report to the ombudsman’s officer under provincial whistleblower investigation.
• February 2017 – six new, alarmed BiPAP machines are put into use at the Brandon hospital.
• April 2017 – Mohammed starts a gradual return-to-work program, but believes there are still training issues with the new machines. When he raises these issues on his first day back, he alleges he was fired and escorted out of the hospital by security staff. Prairie Mountain Health denies he was fired, as does his union in email correspondence with Mohammed.
• August 2017 – Manitoba’s ombudsman releases a confidential report confirming wrongdoing occurred at the Brandon hospital.
— source: the ombudsman’s report into the allegations, interviews with Ian Mohammed
Your support has enabled us to provide free access to stories about COVID-19 because we believe everyone deserves trusted and critical information during the pandemic.
Our readership has contributed additional funding to give Free Press online subscriptions to those that can’t afford one in these extraordinary times — giving new readers the opportunity to see beyond the headlines and connect with other stories about their community.
To those who have made donations, thank you.
To those able to give and share our journalism with others, please Pay it Forward.
The Free Press has shared COVID-19 stories free of charge because we believe everyone deserves access to trusted and critical information during the pandemic.
While we stand by this decision, it has undoubtedly affected our bottom line.
After nearly 150 years of reporting on our city, we don’t want to stop any time soon. With your support, we’ll be able to forge ahead with our journalistic mission.
If you believe in an independent, transparent, and democratic press, please consider subscribing today.
We understand that some readers cannot afford a subscription during these difficult times and invite them to apply for a free digital subscription through our Pay it Forward program.
Updated on Saturday, April 14, 2018 at 7:28 AM CDT: Final