Published on:

Warming Blanket Lawsuit Case Value | 2018 Update

As of May, 2017, there are over 1,524 Bair Hugger warming blanket lawsuits pending in the MDL in Minnesota.

In one typical case, a New York couple claims that a surgical warming blanket used after the husband’s hip replacement operation caused severe infections, resulting in four additional surgeries. A man and his wife filed a lawsuit in New York on Nov. 25, 2015, against 3M, the manufacturer of the Bair Hugger forced-air warming system. Medical facilities commonly use this blanket during knee and hip replacement operations. In addition to 3M, the lawsuit lists the Arizant Healthcare, Inc. and its subsidiaries as Defendants.

The value of surgical blanket lawsuits is still being determined

The value of surgical blanket lawsuits is still being determined, but many of these infection cases involve serious injury and death.

During the surgery on Oct. 24, 2012, medical personnel used a Bair Hugger on the man’s left hip, supposedly to help regulate body temperature. However, the warming blanket might have introduced bacteria into the surgical site, resulting in infection. The Plaintiff received five surgeries within 16 months, including the original surgery, and he now struggles with mobility and needs crutches to walk.

Per the lawsuit: “Due to the infection, Plaintiff needed four additional surgical procedures to remove the implant and clean the infected area within sixteen months from the original implant surgery, and he continues to suffer limited mobility, requiring crutches to ambulate.”

According to diverse news reports, this Plaintiff is far from alone; many consumers across the nation have taken legal action after illnesses they’ve acquired after using the Bair Hugger, following hip and knee surgeries.

The Plaintiffs noted that 3M sent a letter to the FDA way back in June 1997, that warned of possible contamination issues with this product.


How Bair Hugger Works and Why It Might Lead to Infection

During and after surgery, doctors place a disposable blanket on the patient, while the 3M Bair Hugger warmer blows hot air. Plaintiffs assert that the blanket’s design increases bacteria in the air around the surgery site, encouraging infection.

In 2000, 3M claimed that the product’s air filter complied with High-Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) standards, removing 99.97 percent of the possible infectors. However, the lawsuit states that the filter only removes 65 percent of contaminants. Plaintiffs insist that the use of the product increases the risk of introducing pathogens into the surgical site.

Some surgeons have expressed significant concerns about the 3M product, and they have argued that other warming devices might be safer for patients. The plaintiffs allege that, instead of addressing safety concerns, the manufacturer minimized the Bair Hugger’s risk, which led to the injuries.

This New York lawsuit lists the following claims: negligence, negligent misrepresentation, strict liability, failure to warn, defective design and manufacture, fraudulent misrepresentation and concealment, breach of express and implied warranty, and violations of New York consumer protection laws. Plaintiffs further alleged loss of consortium and they are requesting punitive sanctions and compensatory damages.

Settlement Value of Bair Hugger Warming Blanket Claims

Is it premature to look at the value of Bair Hugger surgical warming blanket cases? Absolutely.  These cases are new.  But settlement and trial value of these cases is what really matters to victims.  Personal injury lawsuits are not going to fix the victim’s injuries or bring the decedent back to life.  The system only has money as a means of compensating the victims.

The value of these claims is more likely to hinge on the extent and scope of the injury or death.  In injury cases, the key is going to be how severe and permanent the injuries to the victim were.  In death cases, the key is going to be whether there is a cap on economic damages in the state where the claim is brought and the age and future earning capacity of the victim.

Is this answer to the settlement value of these claims too general?  Yes. It is hard to give specifics on the value of individual cases because there are some many factors to consider.  But the mass tort settlement value of these cases will become more apparent in the months to come.

What’s Next in the MDL?

In December 2017,  the MDL judge shot down 3M’s incredibly annoying strategy of attacking the credibility of plaintiffs’ scientific case.  U.S. District Judge Joan Ericksen ruled that the plaintiffs science is credible.  Hopefully, these cases continue to move forward towards an eventual out of court class action settlement.

Important Bair Hugger Studies

  • Belani KG, Albrecht M, McGovern PD, Reed M, Nachsheim C, 2013, Patient warming excess heat: the effects on orthopedic operating room ventilation performance, Anesthesia & Analgesia 117, 406-411.
  • Reed M, Kimberger O, McGovern PD, Albrecht MC, 2013, Forced-air warming design: evaluation of intake filtration, internal microbial buildup, and airborne-contamination emissions, AANA Journal 81(4), 1-6.
  • Albrecht M, Gauthler R, Leper D, 2009, Forced-air warming: a source of airborne contamination in the operating room? Orthopedic Reviews, 1e28, 85-88.

Getting a  Bair Hugger Warming Blanket Attorney

Call us today at 800-553-8082 to discuss your options and how you might be able to receive compensation for the harm that was done to you. You can also talk to us about your Bair Hugger™ lawsuit with a free online consultation. Get the help you need today.