Propofol abuse among healthcare workers: an analysis of criminal cases using the database of the Supreme Court of South Korea's judgments.

BACKGROUND: Due to its abuse potential, propofol has been classified as a controlled substance since February 2011 in South Korea. Healthcare workers are exposed to propofol abuse considering their easy access to this substance in hospitals. Therefore, we aimed to investigate propofol abuse among healthcare workers through the database of the Supreme Court in South Korea. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed adjudicated criminal cases related to propofol abuse among healthcare workers from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2020, using the database of the Supreme Court of South Korea's judgments. We collected the clinical characteristics and punishment-related information of healthcare workers who abused propofol. RESULTS: Of the 194 cases collected using the search term 'propofol,' 20 were included in the final analysis. The most common healthcare workers who abused propofol were nursing aides (n = 15). Among them, 40% (n = 8) of the defendants had previously been punished for substance abuse, and 35% (n = 7) had a history of psychological disease. Of the defendants, 65% (n = 13) self-administered propofol more than twice, and the median number of self-administrations was three. Except for two, the defendants were sentenced to imprisonment, including suspended sentences, and the median values of their duration of prison and probation were 9 months and 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: Despite propofol being strongly regulated as a controlled substance in South Korea, its abuse among healthcare workers remains. Healthcare workers should be vigilant against its abuse among themselevs.

An Analysis of Judicial Cases Concerning Analgesic-Related Medication Errors in the Republic of Korea.

OBJECTIVES: Analgesic-related medication errors can be a threat to patient safety. This study aimed to identify and describe medication errors that can cause serious adverse drug events (ADEs) related to analgesic use. METHODS: This retrospective, observational, medicolegal study analyzed closed cases concerning complications induced by medication errors involving 3 commonly used analgesics: opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and acetaminophen (AAP). Cases closed between 1994 and 2019 that were available in the Korean Supreme Court judgment database system were included. Medication errors were categorized using a classification system (developed by our group) based on the stage of drug administration. Clinical characteristics and judgment statuses were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 71 cases were included in the final analysis (opioids, n = 30; NSAIDs, n = 35; AAP, n = 6). Among them, 43 claims (60.6%) resulted in payments to the plaintiffs, with a median payment of $86,607 (interquartile range, $34,554-$193,782). The severity of ADEs was high (National Association of Insurance Commissioners scale ≥6) in 88.7% (n = 63) of claims, with a total of 44 (62%) deaths. The most common types of ADEs associated with opioid, NSAID, and AAP use were respiratory depression, anaphylactic shock, and fulminant hepatitis, respectively. The most common recognized medication errors associated with opioid, NSAIDs, and AAP were inappropriate patient monitoring (n = 10; 33.3%), improper analgesic choice (n = 15; 42.9%), and inappropriate treatment after ADEs (n = 3; 50%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that efforts should be made to reduce medication errors related to analgesic use to prevent permanent injury and potential malpractice claims.

Medical malpractice related to dialysis and vascular access: An analysis of lawsuit judgements in South Korea.

BACKGROUND: Hemodialysis is a life-saving renal replacement treatment for patients with chronic kidney disease, but various complications occur during hemodialysis and associated procedures. This study was conducted to analyze the specific characteristics of hemodialysis-related complications and malpractice that have led to legal disputes. METHODS: Judgments from cases litigated between 1991 and 2019 due to complications related to hemodialysis or vascular access were analyzed using the database of the Korean Supreme Court Judgment System. RESULTS: Of 32 dialysis-related litigation cases, 14 cases were dismissed and malpractice was recognized in 18 cases. Among all cases and those in which malpractice was recognized, the most common clinical complication was associated with central venous catheter (CVC) insertion (25.0% and 42.9%, respectively). In 22 of 32 (68.8%) cases, complications occurred before or after (not during) dialysis, and performance error was the most common clinical error leading to legal disputes (58.3%). Complications resulted in death in 59.4% of cases, and CVC-related complications were associated with the largest proportion (63.2%) of deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Hemodialysis was implicated in various medical disputes, and CVC-related complications were the most common and serious adverse events. Clinicians' awareness of the incidence and severity of possible complications of hemodialysis procedures should be increased.

Medico-legal implications for the colon perforation during colonoscopy.

Colon perforation is the most serious complication of colonoscopy, and tends to be considered as malpractice. The aim of this study was to identify the characteristics and causes of medical accidents by analyzing lawsuit cases on colon perforation during colonoscopy. We collected judgment results that were ruled from 2005 to 2015 using the keyword 'colonoscopy' in the 'Korea's Written Judgment Public Reading System' of the Supreme Court, and extracted the cases of colon perforation. Characteristics of medical accidents and the decisions of courts were analyzed from written judgments. Twenty-two lawsuits were analyzed. Most cases were ruled in favor of the plaintiff (n = 20). The allegations against defendants, as filed by the plaintiffs, were performance error (n = 22), improper monitoring after colonoscopy (n = 7), and a lack of informed consent (n = 8). The median compensation was 9335.47 US dollars; this is about 130 times the cost of a single colonoscopy in Korea. The greater the intestinal damage, the greater the amount of compensation (p = 0.016). The time interval from procedure to diagnosis of perforation was most frequently 24 h later (n = 9). It is important to educate patients completely about the symptoms of colon perforation and to guide them to contact medical institutions immediately when symptoms occur. In addition, doctors should explain sufficiently the possibility of perforation before colonoscopy to the patient, and not the caregiver, and get informed consent.

Analysis of endotracheal intubation-related judicial precedents in South Korea.

BACKGROUND: Medical malpractice during endotracheal intubation can result in catastrophic complications. However, there are no reports on these severe complications in South Korea. We aimed to investigate the severe complications associated with endotracheal intubation occurring in South Korea, via medicolegal analysis. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the closed judicial precedents regarding complications related to endotracheal intubation lodged between January 1994 and June 2020, using the database of the Supreme Court of Korea. We collected clinical and judicial characteristics from the judgments and analyzed the medical malpractices related to endotracheal intubation. RESULTS: Of 220 potential cases, 63 were included in the final analysis. The most common event location was the operating room (n = 20, 31.7%). All but 3 cases were associated with significant permanent or more severe injury, including 31 deaths. The most common problems were failed or delayed intubation (n = 56, 88.9%). Supraglottic airway device was used in 5.2% (n = 3) cases of delayed or failed intubation. Fifty-one (81%) cases were ruled in favor of the plaintiff in the claims for damages, with a median payment of Korean Won 133,897,845 (38,000,000, 308,538,274). The most common malpractice recognized by the court was that of not attempting an alternative airway technique (n = 32, 50.8%), followed by violation of the duty of explanation (n = 10, 15.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results could increase physicians' awareness of the major complications related to endotracheal intubation and help ensure patient safety.

Medicolegal lessons learned from thyroidectomy-related lawsuits: an analysis of judicial precedents in South Korea from 1998 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Thyroid cancer is one of the most common cancers in South Korea, and thyroidectomy is still frequently performed. As new diagnostic methods have led to a significant increase in the early detection of thyroid cancer worldwide, medical disputes related to thyroid surgery are also likely to increase. The purpose of this study was to investigate the causes of medical disputes related to thyroidectomy and to identify ways to prevent unnecessary disputes and malpractice. METHODS: We analyzed 35 judicial decisions involving thyroidectomy in South Korea from January 1998 to July 2019. RESULTS: The most common cause of lawsuits was "performance error during surgery" (n=19), especially "recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) injury" (n=7), of which five cases were ruled medical malpractice. For lawsuits involving misdiagnosis (n=14), five regarding fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) and frozen section examination were ruled malpractice. The most common malpractice related to informed consent was "lack of explanation about surgery complications" (n=10). CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons should follow guidelines to protect themselves from diagnostic error dispute; performing FNAC more often might also prevent lawsuits. When the courts judge the surgeon's negligence in cases of RLN injuries, whether bilateral or unilateral, it is necessary to consider fully the surgeon's efforts to prevent RLN injuries. Providing information and building trust through sufficient patient-doctor communication is crucial.

Medicolegal Consideration to Prevent Medical Malpractice Regarding Opioid Administration: An Analysis of Judicial Opinion in South Korea.

PURPOSE: Although the use of opioids is increasing in South Korea, there have been no studies on the serious complications caused by the opioids. The aim of this study was to investigate the rare but serious complications through medicolegal analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 1994 to December 2019, we retrospectively reviewed the closed cases of lawsuits involving the complications of opioids using the database of judgments of the Supreme Court of Korea. General characteristics, opioid-induced complications, and judicial characteristics were analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 46 cases, 31 cases of complications were finally included in the analysis. There were 28 (90.3%) cases of opioid administration for acute pain and 3 (9.7%) cases for chronic pain. The most commonly prescribed opioid was pethidine (n = 13, 41.9%), and the most common complication was respiratory depression (n = 17, 54.8%). All except two cases were associated with permanent injuries, including 18 (58%) deaths. Twelve (38.7%) cases were ruled in favor of the plaintiff in the claims for damages, with a median payment of United States dollar (USD) 126,346 (IQR: USD 77,275-379,219). Of these cases, the most frequently admitted complaint by the court was the neglect of observation (n = 10, 32.3%), followed by the inappropriate drug choice (n = 4, 12.9%). Eleven (36.7%) cases were plaintiffs' claims for violating explanation obligations, of which 2 (6.7%) were recognized in the court. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that physicians must be aware of the serious complications related to opioids and health policies to prevent such complications and malpractice should be adopted.

Analysis of judicial precedent cases regarding epidural injection in chronic pain management in Republic of Korea.

BACKGROUND: Although there is a low incidence of complications associated with epidural injections, pain physicians should still remain vigilant for potentially serious adverse outcomes. This study aimed to identify and describe the major complications of epidural injections. METHODS: This retrospective, observational, medicolegal study analyzed closed cases of precedents involving complications of epidural injections from January 1997 to August 2019 using the database of the Supreme Court of Korea's judgement system. Clinical characteristics and judgement statuses were analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 73 potential cases assessed for eligibility, a total of 49 malpractice cases were included in the final analysis. Thirty-three claims resulted in payments to the plaintiffs, with a median payment of US$103 828 (IQR: US$45 291-US$265 341). The most common complication was infection (n=13, 26.5%), followed by worsening pain (n=8, 16.3%). Physician malpractice before, during, and after the procedure was claimed by plaintiffs in 18 (36.7%), 44 (89.8%), and 31 (63.3%) cases, respectively. Of these cases, 6 (33.3%), 19 (43.2%), and 15 (48.4%), respectively, were adjudicated in favor of the plaintiffs by the courts. In cases involving postprocedural physician errors, the majority (13/15) of the plaintiff verdicts were related to delayed management. Violation of the physician's duty of informed consent was claimed by plaintiffs in 31 (63.3%) cases, and 14 (45.2%) of these cases were judged medical malpractice. CONCLUSIONS: Our data will allow pain physicians to become acquainted with the major epidural injection-associated complications that underlie malpractice cases.

Medical malpractice related to drug-induced anaphylaxis: An analysis of lawsuit judgments in South Korea.

Drug-induced anaphylaxis (DIA) is a highly paradoxical disorder involving a fatal response to medicines prescribed for therapeutic purposes. This study aimed to improve the awareness on DIA and to prevent errors through an analysis of lawsuit judgments.Sentenced judgments involving DIA from 1998 to 2017 using the database of the Korean Supreme Court Judgment System were collected. General characteristics, results, and recognized negligence of DIA litigation cases were analyzed.Of 27 lawsuit cases included, antibiotics (n = 6, 22.2%), radiocontrast media (n = 6, 22.2%), and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (n = 5, 18.5%) were the most common drugs that had caused DIA. Cardiac arrest was reported in 23 cases (85.2%). The median time interval from drug administration to diagnosis and from diagnosis to cardiac arrest were 7 (interquartile range, IQR = 0-35) and 5 minutes (IQR = 0-33), respectively, suggesting insufficient time to cope with anaphylaxis. Consequently, either death (n = 18, 66.7%) or ischemic brain injury (n = 9, 33.3%) occurred in all cases. Violation of duty of care was recognized in 19 cases (70.4%) with median awarded amount of $106,060 (IQR = $70,296-$168,363). The recognized negligence included inadequate observation after drug administration (n = 6), delayed or missed epinephrine administration (n = 6), ignoring a history of allergy or drug hypersensitivity (n = 6), and prescription error (n = 5).It is necessary to improve the awareness on DIA, because making a trivial error in any process of history taking, drug prescription and administration, observation, and/or emergency treatment may have fatal consequences that can lead to indemnity.

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

BACKGROUND: Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) involves severe pain and it is difficult to identify the exact cause or pathogenesis. Therefore, there are controversies regarding legal issues related to the establishment of damage in medical malpractice lawsuits involving CRPS. This study aimed to analyze malpractice lawsuits involving CRPS, which occurred after the disputed medical treatment, to provide information on the courts' opinion and characteristics of the cases. METHODS: This study analyzed 23 lawsuit judgments involving CRPS that were sentenced from 2005 to 2015. RESULTS: A total of 12 of the 23 cases were partially ruled in favor of the plaintiff. The average amount (KRW) claimed was 470,638,385 ± 860,634,092 (21,000,000 to 4,020,000,000), and that awarded was 72,906,843 ± 53,389,367 (15,000,000 to 181,080,803). Sixteen of the 23 cases had CRPS type I. In 11 of 23 cases, the site of the pain was located in the lower limb and in 14 cases there was no presence of trauma or event prior to medical treatment. CONCLUSION: Nerve injury was the most frequent reason for taking responsibility in compensating damage in malpractice cases involving CRPS. Physicians should consider various possibilities of such complications in medical practices. It is important to identify and improve areas which need to be improved for patient safety through analyzing the lawsuit judgment cases.