I Look Forward To Some Clarification Of This Story

A construction worker went into New York-Presbyterian Hospital to be treated for a bump on the head. The hospital records indicate that the patient was alert and fully oriented. When the doctor said a rectal exam was necessary, the man refused. Whereupon, the doctor sedated the patient and then performed the rectal exam. This is going to court, and I would certainly like to know what sort of head injury diagnosis can be done via a rectal exam (after all, the patient was NOT George W. Bush), and what could justify the use of sedation to perform a medical exam against a patient's consent.