Legal mechanisms and procedures in alleged medical negligence: A review of Indian laws and judgments.

Medical malpractice suits are quite common in developed countries leading to an increase in malpractice insurance. Recent trends indicate that India is at the cusp of a medical malpractice crisis. There has been a rise in medical negligence cases filed against doctors, though often the allegations are frivolous. In such cases, doctors can be considered as the second victim of medical negligence. Members of the medical fraternity do not learn much about law during their training and are often naïve regarding various options available to counter such cases as well as relevant legal doctrines. Doctors thus not only need to remain updated on medical knowledge and skills but also obtain knowledge of legal paradigms. We aim to raise awareness among doctors about handling negligence cases in various forums and share insights through relevant literature, court judgments and government orders. We also map the process of handling complaints, procedures followed in various courts and the different levels of remedies available for doctors.

Investigation on physical restraint use in hospital: health responsibility, ethical and medical legal considerations.

Background: The issue of restraint has long been considered a difficult political and social situation, affecting both healthcare wor-kers and facilities. The practice of restraint is still widespread in many public and private care settings, but there is a lack of systemic studies capable of monitoring the phenomenon. The framing of the question essentially concerns the right to personal freedom, guaranteed by the Italian Constitution. Materials and Methods: An anonymous questionnaire was developed containing questions on knowledge of the regulations on restraints, how, ways, and when they are implemented, and general information such as age, gender, educational qualification, qualification, O.Us. to which they belong. The collected data were statistically processed (Chi-square test) with the Epi Info 7.1.5 program (CDC-Atlanta- USA). A total of 1002 questionnaires were completed. The stratification of the sample by structure shows that 73.9% were public facilities. The indicative figure is represented by the 23.8% of respondents who say that "the restraint is not noted in the medical record". Conclusions: Restraint could be a real risk for the healthcare worker, encroaching on the issue of health liability. It is therefore important to raise awareness among healthcare professionals and top management of the need to structure, at company level, procedures that comply with the "Recommendations on physical restraint" to overcome the use of restraint through the improvement of care pathways in compliance with organizational and risk management standards.

A case of suicide of psychiatric patient in the Sicilian hospital: accidental or professional liability of "top management"?

Background: In the hospital environment, any liability for organizational inadequacy and/or inefficiency, or again for defects in the facilities, or inadequacy of health equipment may be found in the work of the apex professional figures: Medical Director, the General Manager, and/or others. The responsibility for the internal organization of the department falls on the figure of the Director of the Complex Structure where the deficiencies have not been promptly and adequately reported to the top figures. Case Report: A woman 61-year-old, was admitted on a voluntary basis to the Department of Psychiatry. On the third day, in the early morning hours, the patient was found on the ground floor, lying on the floor near the entrance door of the ward with a lacerated contusion wound to the head. The woman underwent total body CT examination with findings of fractured polytrauma as well as subarachnoid hemorrhage and complete fracture of the spleen, which was surgically removed. Three days later, despite the care given, death occurred. The injuries ascertained were consistent with voluntary precipitation from the second-floor stairwell window. The investigations conducted by the police and the checks carried out by the head of the Internal Prevention and Protection Service and the company's Risk Manager, highlighted multiple critical issues. Conclusion: The case allows for numerous considerations relating to liability profiles in the determinism of the patient's death, the hospital's company failure to implement measures to prevent the patient's suicide in the hospital was influential.

[Civil, administrative and criminal liability of medical workers].

From the point of view of legislation, medical care refers to the provision of services, however, the issues of legal responsibility of a medical worker, which is imposed in case of violation of the rights of a patient, are quite difficult and are characterized by controversial points for assessment. Today, a large number of complaints from patients are filed against doctors, requiring consideration by the competent authorities. The article considers the features of civil, administrative and criminal liability applied to medical workers.

Loss of chance: the uncertainty of the event or the uncertainty of the conduct? Case Series and Medicolegal Considerations.

Background: The concept of damages for loss of chance originated in France in 1877 and was adapted to healthcare in 1962. In Italy, it was first introduced in healthcare liability in 2004, with Civil Court of Cassation decision No. 4400. Italian jurisprudence recognizes the loss of chance as an independent, legally and economically assessable damage, distinct from the actual outcome lost. The landmark St. Martin Judgments of 2019 further established that such damages can be claimed if they involve appreciable, serious, and consistent values. This requires proving a causal link between the conduct and the lost chance, based on established civil law criteria. Case report: 1) a 71-year-old man whose lung carcinoma was not diagnosed in time, leading to a significant reduction in survival chances. 2) a woman whose breast cancer diagnosis was delayed, resulting in a more advanced stage and decreased survival prospects. Discussion: In medical professional liability, the Supreme Court requires a high probability or certainty of causation for recognizing the causal link between wrongful conduct and damage. The assessment involves proving both the causal link and the reasonable probability of a lost opportunity's realization. Hypothetical damage is insufficient for compensation. Conclusions: The compensability of loss of chance relies on proving the causal link between the negligent act and the uncertain event, where the impact on the patient's non-pecuniary sphere is significant. Medicolegal practice faces challenges in distinguishing between causality and damage, which can lead to confusion between biological damage and damage from loss of opportunity.

Analysis of the contentious relating to medical liability for healthcare-associated infections (HAI) in a Sicilian hospital.

Background: Since 2012, the Sicilian regional government, in view of the increase in malpractice claims, has adopted a "self-insurance system" The claims management activities have been delegated to the Claims Management Committees (CMCs), the importance of which was also emphasized by Law No. 24/2017. This study aims to describe the experience of Sicilian Hospital CMC and analyze the claims' features, especially for contentious HAIs. Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) continue to be a major public health concern. The contraction of infection during hospitalization generally results in a significant worsening of the patient's quality of life and prolongation of his or her stay. Still, it is also responsible for an increase in costs that burden the hospital and the entire Health System. Material and Methods: The study investigates the analysis of claims received by a Messina Hospital Company between January 2015 and December 2023 even though for events that occurred in earlier years. From the database, cases in which the Company was sued for HAIs were extrapolated and analyzed, distinguishing them by year and by Department. The data collected were statistically processed with the Epi Info 7.1.5 program (CDC - Atlanta - USA). Conclusion: The CMC experience highlighted a statistically significant increase in complaints especially for those relating to HAI, without differences by Department. In most cases, the CMC admitted the hospital's liability, and an attempt at conciliation was promoted and moreover risk management initiatives were adopted. This is important when considering the recent ruling 6386/2023 of March 3, 2023.

Case of tracheal rupture after endotracheal intubation: clinical risk management and medico-legal considerations.

Background: Tracheal injury may be a rare complication of the endotracheal intubation procedure. Incidence and determinant factors are not well known, nevertheless a greater incidence have been recognized with a difficult maneuver or the use of nitrogen peroxide. The therapeutic approach can be conservative or surgical, depending on the characteristics of the lesion and of the patient and therefore the outcomes of medico-legal interest can be different. Case description: It is a case of alleged medical liability regarding a 70-year-old woman, that during the intubation procedure was pouncing on the right. Furthermore, nitrous oxide was used as an anaesthetic. A few hours after the operation the patient showed swelling on the right half of the face and on the right lateral region of the neck. The emergency chest CT scan highlighted subcutaneous emphysema and pneumomediastinum. In the operating room, fibrobronchoscopy was performed with a double-lumen bronchial tube which confirmed the hypotheses lesion; then, right posterolateral thoracotomy was perfor-med followed by suturing of the tracheal lesion. Subsequently, the patient was discharged in good clinical conditions but with a scar in the region of the right hemithorax. Conclusions: Iatrogenic tracheal injury is a rare and fearful complication of the orotracheal intubation procedure. Although risk factors that increase the probability of its onset have been recognized, in most cases it is not possible to identify the cause. From a medico-legal point of view, tracheal injury after intubation is unpredictable and inevitable, so in the case reported it was decided to proceed with a conciliatory solution.

Medical negligence under pressure: obligations of clinicians and healthcare services in the setting of resource limitations.

Healthcare provision takes place in a variety of contexts, with variations of resources available to practitioners and their patients. Effects from the COVID-19 pandemic superimposed on existing system demands have driven increasing concern about resource limitations, particularly in rural and remote settings. This article explores the legal liability of medical practitioners and healthcare services with respect to actions in negligence arising from harm to patients suffered, either partly or wholly, as a result of resource limitations.

How Might Antibiotic Stewardship Programs Influence Clinicians' Autonomy and Organizations' Liability?

Federal and state governments mandate some health care organizations to implement antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs). Some early adopters developed model ASPs that have helped set industry standards; other benchmarks will likely be forged in subsequent regulation, legislation, and jurisprudence. This article considers how ASP designs can affect professional autonomy, especially of frontline antibiotic stewards who are usually physicians and pharmacists. This article also considers how ASP development and implementation might influence standards of care and malpractice liability.

When Governors Prioritize Individual Freedom over Public Health: Tort Liability for Government Failures.

Over half the states have enacted laws diminishing or curtailing the rights of the executive branch (legislatures or governors) to enact laws to preserve, protect, or safeguard public health in the wake of the COVID-19 emergency. Governor DeSantis, of Florida, for example, effectively banned mask mandates in schools during the high point of the epidemic--based on flawed science and erroneous data--and now wants to make that response permanent. The rules effectuating this Executive Order were enacted under an emergency order finding a threat to public health. Nevertheless, the response promulgated by the Florida Department of Health was to prevent public health measures, favoring individual liberties, parental rights (which have previously been held not to apply in the context of the spread of contagious disease epidemics) at the expense of public health and safety. This article explores alternative means to compel state governments, heretofore vested with the police power to protect public health, to comply with this obligation, using the Florida situation as a case study.

Legal analysis of South Korean cosmetic filler litigations for safer medical practices.

Cosmetic filler injections have gained popularity in recent years, but the rise in complications has led to an increase in legal disputes. This study analyzes civil court rulings related to cosmetic filler injection lawsuits in South Korea from 2007 to 2023. A retrospective case analysis was performed using a systematic database search, and a mixed-methods approach was employed for data analysis. The study examined 27 cases, revealing a high rate of liability findings against medical practitioners. Skin necrosis and blindness were the most common complications, and intravascular filler injection was recognized as negligence. Violation of informed consent was found in most cases, with mean compensation awards of ￦193,019,107 KRW ($142,831 USD) for first instance cases and ￦81,845,052 KRW ($60,564 USD) for second instance cases. The findings emphasize the importance of practitioner awareness, adherence to precautionary measures, and proactive prevention and management of complications. Collaboration among stakeholders is crucial for developing strategies that prioritize patient safety and minimize legal disputes in the aesthetic medicine industry. This study provides valuable insights for enhancing medical practices and safeguarding patient well-being in the field of cosmetic filler injections.

Liability of Health Professionals Using Sensors, Telemedicine and Artificial Intelligence for Remote Healthcare.

In the last few decades, there has been an ongoing transformation of our healthcare system with larger use of sensors for remote care and artificial intelligence (AI) tools. In particular, sensors improved by new algorithms with learning capabilities have proven their value for better patient care. Sensors and AI systems are no longer only non-autonomous devices such as the ones used in radiology or surgical robots; there are novel tools with a certain degree of autonomy aiming to largely modulate the medical decision. Thus, there will be situations in which the doctor is the one making the decision and has the final say and other cases in which the doctor might only apply the decision presented by the autonomous device. As those are two hugely different situations, they should not be treated the same way, and different liability rules should apply. Despite a real interest in the promise of sensors and AI in medicine, doctors and patients are reluctant to use it. One important reason is a lack clear definition of liability. Nobody wants to be at fault, or even prosecuted, because they followed the advice from an AI system, notably when it has not been perfectly adapted to a specific patient. Fears are present even with simple sensors and AI use, such as during telemedicine visits based on very useful, clinically pertinent sensors; with the risk of missing an important parameter; and, of course, when AI appears "intelligent", potentially replacing the doctors' judgment. This paper aims to provide an overview of the liability of the health professional in the context of the use of sensors and AI tools in remote healthcare, analyzing four regimes: the contract-based approach, the approach based on breach of duty to inform, the fault-based approach, and the approach related to the good itself. We will also discuss future challenges and opportunities in the promising domain of sensors and AI use in medicine.

Comparison of Laws that Impact Volunteer Response in Three Disaster-Prone Southeastern States.

OBJECTIVE: As natural disasters become more frequent and severe, the ability of impacted states to rapidly scale up their capacity to respond and facilitate recovery through volunteers is ever more crucial. However, the legal landscape that may facilitate or hamper augmentation through volunteers has yet to be fully explored. DESIGN: This study utilized policy surveillance methodology to code relevant laws identified in searches using the Emergency Law Inventory database and Westlaw. SETTING: We assessed laws in three natural disaster-prone states: North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed the presence of liability protection, license reciprocity, and scope of practice laws for health care volunteers. RESULTS: Of the three assessed legal domains, liability protection for health care volunteers across all states contained the most robust language. Liability protections apply unless the health care volunteers act with reckless disregard, willful misconduct, or gross negligence. However, nuance exists based on which organizations (state vs charitable) volunteers are affiliated with to qualify for coverage. License reciprocity for out-of-state specific health care professions entering the impacted states was available across all three states. However, only Georgia enacted federal model legislation that provides additional flexibility regarding credentialing and liability protections. Lastly, very few laws addressed the scope of practice in impacted states. CONCLUSIONS: Comparisons of laws that impact the ability of health care volunteers to respond and recover from disasters are scarce. More research needs to be performed to better understand the laws that impact volunteers in emergencies, particularly as the public health system is overtasked when providing services to impacted communities.

Doctors, FIRs, and Arrest in Alleged Medical Negligence Cases in India: Demystifying the Legal Tenability.

The relationship between a doctor and a patient is a contract, retaining the essential elements of the tort. Modern medical practice has evolved alongside the court of law to regulate the conduct of doctors and hospitals to reduce litigations of medical negligence. Lately, Indian patients have become more aware of their rights and the Consumer Protection Act. This awareness encourages patients to litigate and seek the help of redressal forums to mitigate their loss/injury in cases of medical negligence. Though there is a rise in complaints of medical negligence filed against doctors and hospitals, these allegations are often frivolous. The specter of litigation constantly looms over medical practitioners, who frequently struggle to defend themselves in a court of law, causing undue anxiety and anguish. Thus, a doctor can be considered the second victim in a medical negligence case. Lack of awareness regarding their legal rights and pertinent laws coupled with contradictory actions of the law enforcement agencies while handling alleged medical negligence cases worsens a doctor's trepidation. Hence, this article attempts to raise awareness among medical professionals, which will thereby allay undue fear while facing an allegation.

[Medical overuse, defensive medicine and new reform of professional mistake].

Reflecting on the inappropriateness (medical overuse) and on defensive medicine, the Authors wonder whether the new Italian reform of professional guilt, desired at all institutional levels, will actually contain the high economic costs produced by these large and widespread phenomena. After having characterized the medical overuse and the defensive medicine indicating the common traits and main differences, the reflection is conducted by exploring the many scientific evidence that does not document any causal link between the decriminalization of professional conduct and the containment of the costs produced by the prescriptive inappropriateness. They conclude by stating that, for their containment, a third reform of professional liability will not be helpful. Instead, it must focus on other issues, mainly addressing the excessive reliance on judicial recourse. It should provide for mandatory out-of-court conciliatory mechanisms and clarifying the protective umbrella of the doctor's non-criminality.

A review on legal issues of medical robots.

This paper examines the legal challenges associated with medical robots, including their legal status, liability in cases of malpractice, and concerns over patient data privacy and security. And this paper scrutinizes China's nuanced response to these dilemmas. An analysis of Chinese judicial practices and legislative actions reveals that current denial of legal personality to AI at this stage is commendable. To effectively control the financial risks associated with medical robots, there is an urgent need for clear guidelines on responsibility allocation for medical accidents involving medical robots, the implementation of strict data protection laws, and the strengthening of industry standards and regulations.

Emerging post-Dobbs liability concerns for providers handling embryos.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review outlines novel, emerging legal risks for in-vitro fertilization (IVF) providers and patients. RECENT FINDINGS: This article reviews recent antiabortion legal developments that create novel legal risks to IVF. This article examines new potential liability for the handling or managing of embryos, and threats to safe, efficient, standard-of-care practice of IVF. It reviews established US and international judicial and regulatory frameworks based on scientifically grounded recognition of IVF embryos as deserving of 'special respect', and finds this approach to be an alternative for law and policy makers. SUMMARY: Defining life as 'beginning at fertilization' (or 'conception') or otherwise embracing 'embryonic personhood' creates emerging legal vulnerabilities and concerns for IVF patients and professionals who handle embryos and threatens standard-of-care IVF. Internationally and domestically established, scientifically grounded understandings of IVF embryos, rather than religious beliefs, should be the basis for legal frameworks that accord appropriate - but not unlimited - protections to IVF embryos. This article presents this framework as an alternative to the current path being embraced by some US policymakers and courts, as a means of protecting the rights of patients, providers and the families they create.

Death of the suicide law: A changing standard of liability for clinicians.

High rates of suicide continue to plague the modern world, with clinicians, researchers, and policymakers working urgently to ameliorate what has been recognized as a worldwide public health crisis. Under American Law, individuals- including health care providers, could generally not be held liable for causing the suicide of another person. This article presents a review of suicide law in the United States in the context of a recent civil case in which a physician with expertise in mental health was sued for the death of an ex-partner who committed suicide in his home. Historical events and landmark legal cases spanning the 15th century to now are examined and presented as a narrative review to inform society and mental health clinicians a-like towards interpreting the changing medical-legal landscape. As modern advances in science continue to discern the critical biopsychosocial factors that contribute to the act of suicide, there is an inevitably growing concern that suicide may no longer be an incomprehensible nor irrational event as has been assumed for centuries. Thus, it may be considered that individual with expertise and qualification to treat a group of individuals at higher risk of suicide (severe mental illness) may be subject to a different standard than the average individual. This article seeks to present a complex matter where no simple or broad-sweeping conclusions can yet be drawn, however remains a critically important matter for mental health clinicians.

Psychiatric Illness and Clinical Negligence: When Can "Secondary Victims" Successfully Claim for Damages? Recent Developments from the United Kingdom.

On January 11, 2024, the United Kingdom (U.K.) Supreme Court rendered its judgment in Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust, restricting the circumstances in which "secondary victims" can successfully claim for damages in clinical negligence cases. This ruling has provided welcome clarity regarding the scope of negligently caused "pure" psychiatric illness claims, but the judgment may well prove controversial. In this article, I trace the facts and opinion from the majority and also discuss an important dissenting opinion. I then reflect on what the ruling means for psychiatric illness claims by secondary victims, and more broadly on the implications for clinical negligence law. I suggest that while much-needed clarity has been injected in this area of the law, it is difficult, reading the majority of the Supreme Court's emphasis on the restricted scope of a medical practitioner's duty, to envision a scenario in which secondary victim could ever succeed in a clinical negligence context.