Literature DB >> 7676967

Malpractice and radiologists in Cook County, IL: trends in 20 years of litigation.

L Berlin1, J W Berlin.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to report the prevalence and nature of malpractice litigation involving radiology over a 20-year period and to identify trends among types of lawsuits filed. By recognizing where medicolegal risks lie in radiology, risk-management processes can be developed to minimize malpractice exposure and to improve patient care.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of all malpractice lawsuits (18,860) filed against physicians in the greater Chicago area between January 1, 1975, and December 31, 1994. About twelve percent (2219) involved radiologic procedures or radiologists. These lawsuits were divided into six groups: slip-and-fall, radiation oncology, failure to order a radiologic examination, complications, missed diagnoses, and miscellaneous. The yearly percentage of each category relative to the total number of radiology-related suits was determined, and then each group was further divided by specific diagnosis or incident.
RESULTS: Along with all medical malpractice lawsuits, radiology-related suits rose dramatically until 1985, when there was a marked but temporary decline caused by tort reform measures enacted in Illinois. Since then, lawsuits have resumed their annual upward climb, although the overall percentage related to radiology has remained relatively constant (10-15%). The relative number of radiology-related lawsuits in specific categories has changed over the past two decades: the percentages of slip-and-fall, radiation oncology, and miscellaneous cases have decreased, but percentages for the remaining three groups have increased. Lawsuits related to missed diagnoses, which account for the largest category of radiology-related cases, have increased from 34% to 47% of the total. The greatest increase in this category is for breast cancer. Lawsuits claiming injury from complications, the largest subgroup of which is angiography, have grown slightly, but cases alleging failure to order a radiologic examination have shown the greatest percentage increase in the 20-year period, growing from 20% in 1975-1979 to 30% in 1990-1994. This rise is attributed to the greater number of claims involving mammography, CT, MR imaging, and angiography. The growth in failure-to-order lawsuits will have important ramifications as managed care and health reform proposals attempt to limit use of radiologic services.
CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding the fact that tort reform measures in Illinois decreased the frequency of malpractice litigation temporarily in 1985 and will likely do so again in 1995, medical malpractice is likely to continue to plague radiologists unabatedly for many years to come.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7676967     DOI: 10.2214/ajr.165.4.7676967

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  24 in total

1.  Spectrum of diagnostic errors in radiology.

Authors:  Antonio Pinto; Luca Brunese
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2010-10-28

Review 2.  Errors in imaging patients in the emergency setting.

Authors:  Antonio Pinto; Alfonso Reginelli; Fabio Pinto; Giuseppe Lo Re; Federico Midiri; Carlo Muzj; Luigia Romano; Luca Brunese
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-02-03       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Spinal-related malpractice suits against radiologists in the USA-rates, anatomic location, percent of adverse judgments, and average payments.

Authors:  Stephen R Baker; Valdis Lelkes; Ronak H Patel; Alejandro Castro; Uzair Sarmast; Jeremy Whang
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2013-08-30

4.  Non-spinal musculoskeletal malpractice suits against radiologists in the USA--rates, anatomic locations, and payments in a survey of 8,265 radiologists.

Authors:  Stephen R Baker; Ronak H Patel; Valdis Lelkes; Alejandro Castro; Uzair Sarmast; Jeremy Whang
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2013-08-31

5.  Malpractice claims related to musculoskeletal imaging. Incidence and anatomical location of lesions.

Authors:  Adriano Fileni; Gaia Fileni; Paoletta Mirk; Giulia Magnavita; Marzia Nicoli; Nicola Magnavita
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2013-06-25       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 6.  [Incidental findings in musculoskeletal radiology].

Authors:  F Wünnemann; C Rehnitz; M-A Weber
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 0.635

7.  Who is more accurate in the diagnosis of neck of femur fractures, radiologists or orthopaedic trainees?

Authors:  R W Jordan; E Dickenson; N Baraza; K Srinivasan
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2012-06-16       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Clinical information available during emergency department imaging order entry and radiologist interpretation.

Authors:  Tarek N Hanna; Saurabh Rohatgi; Haris N Shekhani; Ishaan Amit Dave; Jamlik-Omari Johnson
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2017-02-27

9.  The PROgnostic Value of unrequested Information in Diagnostic Imaging (PROVIDI) Study: rationale and design.

Authors:  M J A Gondrie; W P Th M Mali; C F M Buckens; P C A Jacobs; D E Grobbee; Y van der Graaf
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-10-02       Impact factor: 8.082

10.  Ethical problems in radiology: medical error and disclosure.

Authors:  N Magnavita; G Magnavita; A Fileni; A Bergamaschi
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2009-08-20       Impact factor: 3.469

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.