PURPOSE: To outline the most common sources of raising malpractice claims in screening mammography and to discuss the related medical litigation issues in the light of the evidence-based medicine. METHODS AND MATERIAL: Electronic and manual search of the relevant literature. RESULTS: The most common cause of malpractice is the delayed diagnosis of breast cancer. The plaintiff must establish that the radiologist was negligent and the delay in diagnosis caused injury to the patient. Literature shows that mammography does not always detect breast cancer, and even skilled radiologists may periodically miss malignant lesions. Also, delay in diagnosis does not always affect treatment and prognosis. Over-promotion of screening mammography has made disproportionately difficult for a defendant radiologist to prevail in a malpractice lawsuit. Thus, screening mammography is at stake, although it saves lives. The public and legal system should be educated about biological processes, medical practice, and the limitations of screening mammography. CONCLUSION: If mammography is to survive medical litigation and continue to save lives a major reform in public perception, in the stance of the mass media, and in the ability of legal system to understand medicine is required. Physicians and medical associations have an important role to play.
PURPOSE: To outline the most common sources of raising malpractice claims in screening mammography and to discuss the related medical litigation issues in the light of the evidence-based medicine. METHODS AND MATERIAL: Electronic and manual search of the relevant literature. RESULTS: The most common cause of malpractice is the delayed diagnosis of breast cancer. The plaintiff must establish that the radiologist was negligent and the delay in diagnosis caused injury to the patient. Literature shows that mammography does not always detect breast cancer, and even skilled radiologists may periodically miss malignant lesions. Also, delay in diagnosis does not always affect treatment and prognosis. Over-promotion of screening mammography has made disproportionately difficult for a defendant radiologist to prevail in a malpractice lawsuit. Thus, screening mammography is at stake, although it saves lives. The public and legal system should be educated about biological processes, medical practice, and the limitations of screening mammography. CONCLUSION: If mammography is to survive medical litigation and continue to save lives a major reform in public perception, in the stance of the mass media, and in the ability of legal system to understand medicine is required. Physicians and medical associations have an important role to play.