hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy due to anaphylactic shock due to antibiotic allergy
AI-generated summary
A 34-year-old woman died from anaphylactic shock to Ceclor, a cephalosporin antibiotic prescribed for otitis externa. Her medical records clearly documented allergies to cephalosporins (Ibilex) and sulphur-based antibiotics, documented at the Europa Medical Centre. Dr G., aged 83, examined the patient and prescribed Ceclor without checking her allergy alert on the computer system. He acknowledged the allergy warning would have been visible when entering notes post-consultation but stated he did not see it. The critical failure was not reviewing the patient's documented allergies before prescribing a cross-reactive antibiotic. This case highlights the importance of systematic allergy verification before any prescription, particularly with computer-flagged alerts, and raises concerns about clinical practice in older practitioners.
AI-generated summary and tagging — may contain inaccuracies; refer to original finding for legal purposes. Report an inaccuracy.
Specialties
general practiceemergency medicineintensive careinfectious diseases
failure to check computer-flagged allergy alert before prescribing
prescription of cross-reactive antibiotic (Ceclor) despite documented cephalosporin allergy
inadequate pre-prescription review of medical records
lack of verbal allergy confirmation documented in notes
delayed recognition and treatment of anaphylaxis
Coroner's recommendations
The Minister for Health should raise this case with the Federal Minister for Health to investigate whether there are sufficient doctors to meet the requirements of South Australia
This page reproduces or summarises information from publicly available findings published by Australian coroners' courts. Coronial is an independent educational resource and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of any coronial court or government body.
Content may be incomplete, reformatted, or summarised. Some material may have been redacted or restricted by court order or privacy requirements. Always refer to the original court publication for the authoritative record.
Copyright in original materials remains with the relevant government jurisdiction. AI-generated summaries and tagging are for educational purposes only, may contain inaccuracies, and must not be treated as legal documents. We welcome feedback for correction — report an inaccuracy here.