Literature DB >> 8281095

Clinical analysis of 100 medicolegal cases.

G Neale1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To find the reasons for legal claims against hospital doctors.
DESIGN: Prospective analysis of requests for medical opinion submitted by solicitors during 1984-93 on legal claims against hospital doctors.
SUBJECTS: 100 successive cases: 98 from the United Kingdom and two from the Republic of Ireland. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Principal underlying causes of claims.
RESULTS: In 44 cases there was no serious clinical error. Of the 56 cases of clinical fault, seven were a failure of communication by doctors, 15 were an isolated error in otherwise good clinical management, 21 were errors that might not have occurred with better control of clinical practice (doctors exceeding their competence, poor clinical judgment, and poor teamwork), and 13 were major errors due to carelessness or incompetence. In 34 cases there was evidence of clinical fault that might escape clinical audit and medicolegal processes. Most of these legal claims have been or are likely to be withdrawn: only five plaintiffs have settled out of court, and 11 are pursuing their actions.
CONCLUSIONS: To reduce the incidence of errors, hospital doctors should consult colleagues about difficult cases and specialists should maintain a broad interest in disease. The NHS clinical complaints procedure should be extended to cover potential claims, and serious cases should be subject to independent external assessment by experienced consultants.

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8281095      PMCID: PMC1679477          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.307.6917.1483

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  5 in total

Review 1.  'No fault' compensation for medical accidents.

Authors:  J Havard
Journal:  Med Sci Law       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 1.266

2.  Medical litigation and the quality of care.

Authors:  N Black
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1990-01-06       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Evaluation of the physicians' obligation to provide information in Denmark.

Authors:  E Segest; F Petersen
Journal:  Med Law       Date:  1988

4.  Medicolegal audit in the West Midlands region: analysis of 100 cases.

Authors:  C Hawkins; I Paterson
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1987-12-12

5.  Patients' complaints: the disciplinary system regarding evaluation of physicians' conduct.

Authors:  E Segest
Journal:  Med Sci Law       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 1.266

  5 in total
  7 in total

1.  A review of 105 negligence claims against accident and emergency departments.

Authors:  A Gwynne; P Barber; F Tavener
Journal:  J Accid Emerg Med       Date:  1997-07

2.  Medical accidents: no such thing?

Authors:  L Evans
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1993-12-04

3.  Managing clinical risk.

Authors:  J Mant; A Gatherer
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-06-11

4.  Adaptation of non-technical skills behavioural markers for delivery room simulation.

Authors:  Fabrizio Bracco; Michele Masini; Gabriele De Tonetti; Francesca Brogioni; Arianna Amidani; Sara Monichino; Alessandra Maltoni; Andrea Dato; Claudia Grattarola; Massimo Cordone; Giancarlo Torre; Claudio Launo; Carlo Chiorri; Danilo Celleno
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2017-03-17       Impact factor: 3.007

5.  The Legal Doctrine on the Liability of Physicians in Medical Malpractice Lawsuits Involving Complex Regional Pain Syndrome.

Authors:  SuHwan Shin; Seung Gyeong Jang; KyeongTae Min; Won Lee; So Yoon Kim
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 2.153

Review 6.  Surgical patient selection and counseling.

Authors:  Matt Ziegelmann; Tobias S Köhler; George C Bailey; Tanner Miest; Manaf Alom; Landon Trost
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-08

Review 7.  Complications: acknowledging, managing, and coping with human error.

Authors:  Sevann Helo; Carol-Anne E Moulton
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-08
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.