{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023204419889502764, 'fraction_numerical': 0.023204419889502764, 'mean_word_length': 5.291666666666667, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Legal Implication of Nerve Injuries Induced by Phlebotomy

Although venipuncture is ordinarily a routine, low-risk procedure,
and injuries to the peripheral nerves that cross the cubital fossa have
rarely been reported, they are sometimes the subject of compensation
claims from patients who complain of having suffered this type of
damage. There is no lack of judgements in civil law in which the
resulting outcomes are contested, for example the positioning of a
cannula needle, inter alia without informing the patient of potential
risks (Court of Cassino, Judgement 09/08/2016). A dated Supreme
Court judgement (No. 32553 of 25/08/2005) already observed that
taking blood samples from the vein, albeit a routine practice, is
nonetheless an invasive procedure which can cause the patient
harm if not performed by professionally prepared practitioners and
following precise techniques and methodologies.