A medicolegal analysis of malpractice claims involving anesthesiologists in the gastrointestinal endoscopy suite (2007-2016).

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Gastrointestinal endoscopy cases make up the largest portion of out of operating room malpractice claims involving anesthesiologists. To date, there has been no closed claims analysis specifically focusing on the claims from the endoscopy suite. We aim to identify associated case characteristics and contributing factors. DESIGN: Retrospective review of closed claims. SETTING: Multi-institutional setting of hospitals that submit data to the Controlled Risk Insurance Company (CRICO) Comparative Benchmarking System, a database representing approximately 30% of annual malpractice cases in the United States. PATIENTS: A total of 58 claims in the gastrointestinal endoscopy suite between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2016. INTERVENTIONS: Gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures. MEASUREMENTS: We analyzed associated factors for each case as well as payments, and severity scores. MAIN RESULTS: There was a difference in the percent of cases that resulted in payment by procedure type, with 91% of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) cases resulting in payment compared with 37.5% of colonoscopy cases, 25% of combined esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD)/colonoscopy cases, 21.4% of EGD cases and 0.0% of endoscopic ultrasound cases (P = 0.0008). Oversedation was a possible contributing factor in 62.5% of cases. The mean payment for all claims involving anesthesiologists in the endoscopy suite was $99,754. CONCLUSIONS: There are differences in the rates of payment of malpractice claims between procedures. ERCPs made up a disproportionate percentage of the total amount paid to patients. While a significant percent of cases involved possible oversedation, these errors were compounded by other factors, such as failure to resuscitate or recognize the acute clinical change. With medically complex patients undergoing endoscopic procedures, it is critical to have well prepared anesthesia providers.

The Perth Emergency Laparotomy Audit.

BACKGROUND: Emergency laparotomies (ELs) are associated with high mortality and substantial outcome variation. There is no prospective Australian data on ELs. The aim of this study was to audit outcome after ELs in Western Australia. METHODS: A 12-week prospective audit was completed in 10 hospitals. Data collected included patient demographics, the clinical pathway, preoperative risk assessment and outcomes including 30-day mortality and length of stay. RESULTS: Data were recorded for 198 (76.2%) of 260 patients. The 30-day mortality was 6.5% (17/260) in participating hospitals, and 5.4% (19 of 354) across Western Australia. There was minimal variation between the three tertiary hospitals undertaking 220 of 354 (62.1%) ELs. The median and mean post-operative lengths of stay, excluding patients who died, were 8 and 10 days, respectively. In the 48 patients with a prospectively documented risk of ≥10%, both a consultant surgeon and anaesthetist were present for 68.8%, 62.8% were admitted to critical care and 45.8% commenced surgery within 2 h. The mortality in those retrospectively (62; 31%) and prospectively risk-assessed was 9.5% and 5.2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This prospective EL audit demonstrated low 30-day mortality with little inter-hospital variation. Individual hospitals have scope to improve their standards of care. The importance of prospective risk assessment is clear.

Dr. Lewis' 10-Year Audit.

Kaufman pediatrician Charles Turner Lewis, MD, battled fraud allegations levied against him by the Office of Inspector General (OIG) from 2005 to 2008 and emerged victorious. To his dismay, he is once again on the receiving end of an OIG letter alleging Medicaid overpayment. The 2015 Texas Legislature responded to TMA's call for improvements in OIG Medicaid fraud investigations of physicians with passage of Senate Bill 207. Organized medicine hopes the law's safeguards will afford due process to doctors under investigation.

An audit of nursing reports for First-Tier Tribunals in a secure inpatient service.

ACCESSIBLE SUMMARY: Very little research has been conducted into the role of nurses in relation to patients' mental health tribunals (known in some countries as review panels). In England nurses are playing an increasingly important role in giving evidence at tribunals and, since October 2013, are required to provide much more detailed written reports than previously. This is the first published study to examine the content of nursing tribunal reports. Overall, the quality of nursing reports was patchy and not as good as those of psychiatrists or social workers, but there was improvement when the audit was repeated. Writing reports for tribunals is a comparatively new and perhaps unfamiliar requirement for nursing staff. Nurses need training in report writing and protected time and a quiet area to write reports. Providing these things is a real challenge on busy inpatient wards. ABSTRACT: In October 2013, the Tribunals Judiciary of England issued a new practice direction stipulating how tribunal reports should be completed. This paper aimed to study the quality of nursing tribunal reports in a secure inpatient service before and after the introduction of the latest practice direction and the issuing of a local template to aid report writing. A total of 160 reports (80 written in 2013 and 80 in 2014) were scored on the presence of 24 key items derived from the latest practice direction. The quality of nursing reports improved in the re-audit from an average of 36.3% of key items present to 51.3% but still lagged behind that of medical and social circumstances reports. Even in the second audit, few reports were signed or commented on why the patient should remain detained. Report length increased from a mean of 2.9 to 4.0 pages but only 27.5% of reports used the template despite widespread publicity. Use of the template resulted in better quality reports. Among other interventions, a training programme in report writing is now underway to assist nurses with meeting the new practice direction requirements. Nurses also need supervision, protected time and a quiet area for report writing.

Unregulated provider perceptions of audit and feedback reports in long-term care: cross-sectional survey findings from a quality improvement intervention.

BACKGROUND: Audit with feedback is a moderately effective approach for improving professional practice in other health care settings. Although unregulated caregivers give the majority of direct care in long-term care settings, little is known about how they understand and perceive feedback reports because unregulated providers have not been directly targeted to receive audit with feedback in quality improvement interventions in long-term care. The purpose of this paper is to describe unregulated care providers' perceptions of usefulness of a feedback report in four Canadian long-term care facilities. METHODS: We delivered monthly feedback reports to unregulated care providers for 13 months in 2009-2010. The feedback reports described a unit's performance in relation to falls, depression, and pain as compared to eight other units in the study. Follow-up surveys captured participant perceptions of the feedback report. We conducted descriptive analyses of the variables related to participant perceptions and multivariable logistic regression to assess the association between perceived usefulness of the feedback report and a set of independent variables. RESULTS: The vast majority (80%) of unregulated care providers (n = 171) who responded said they understood the reports. Those who discussed the report with others and were interested in other forms of data were more likely to find the feedback report useful for making changes in resident care. CONCLUSIONS: This work suggests that unregulated care providers can understand and feel positively about using audit with feedback reports to make changes to resident care. Further research should explore ways to promote fuller engagement of unregulated care providers in decision-making to improve quality of care in long-term care settings.

What do general practitioners think of the new professional competence scheme?

The Irish Medical Practitioners Act 2007 places a statutory obligation on all registered Medical Practitioners to maintain their professional competence by participating in a recognised Professional Competence Scheme. A questionnaire survey was conducted among 48 GPs attending educational meetings to see if doctors had concerns about the Professional Competence Scheme and to ask if they felt they had the necessary time, skills and knowledge to carry out an audit. Twenty-eight GPs (58%) had concerns regarding their participation in the Professional Competence Scheme; 75% were concerned about the time required, and 67% felt they needed further education about the scheme. Although 73% of doctors reported that they understand how to undertake a clinical audit and 50% reported they have carried out an audit in practice, 60% have never had any teaching on audit and 85% would like teaching in this area. Only 48% of the group surveyed felt that audit was practical in their current practice. Doctors have some concerns about the new Professional Competence Scheme, including the audit component. In particular, they report a requirement for more teaching in this area, and are concerned about the time involved.

The federal audit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implants: lessons learned.

The federal government has investigated a large number of institutions regarding concerns that implantable cardioverter-defibrillator procedures were performed in violation of the criteria set forth in a National Coverage Determination. We describe our experience and responses to such an audit, as well as the to complexities and nuances of practicing evidence-based medicine in the setting of heavy regulatory oversight.

[Petitioning for prosecution in the event of violation of the requirement to provide responsible health care]. / Påtalebegjæring ved brudd på kravet om forsvarlig helsehjelp.

BACKGROUND: The Norwegian Board of Health Supervision can petition for prosecution of health care personnel or facilities. The purpose of the survey is to find out what circumstances will prompt the Norwegian Board of Health Supervision to petition for prosecution of doctors and/or facilities for violation of the requirement of responsible conduct, how often this happens and what the outcome is. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Petitions for prosecution in the period 1 February 2002 - 31 October 2008 were reviewed. The data stem mainly from two databases containing about 11 500 cases brought before the Norwegian Board of Health Supervision. RESULTS: During the period, the Boards of Health Supervision at county level petitioned for prosecution in some 7,700 cases where doctors and/or facilities had failed to provide responsible health care. Unsound professional practice was found in about 2400 cases. The Board of Health Supervision petitioned for 19 prosecutions in 16 cases (0.7 %), in 9 of them against doctors and in 10 against facilities. Of the cases against doctors, four ended with fines, four were dismissed and in one a ruling has not yet been handed down. Eight facilities were fined, while the cases against two of them were dismissed. The number of petitions for prosecution has shown a declining tendency during the period. INTERPRETATION: The initiation of criminal proceedings against doctors and facilities is relegated by the Norwegian Board of Health Supervision to a minor position among its supervisory activities.

From identification and review to action--maternal mortality review in the United States.

The maternal mortality review process is an ongoing quality improvement cycle with 5 steps: identification of maternal deaths, collection of medical and other data on the events surrounding the death, review and synthesis of the data to identify potentially alterable factors, the development and implementation of interventions to decrease the risk of future deaths, and evaluation of the results. The most important step is utilization of the data to identify and implement evidence-based actions; without this step, the rest of the work will not have an impact. The review committee ideally is based in the health department of a state (or large city) as a core public health function. This provides stability for the process as well as facilitates implementation of the review committees' recommendations. The review committee should be multidisciplinary, with its members being official representatives of their organizations or departments, again to improve buy-in of the stakeholders.

The medical and legal aspects of maternal mortality.

Sudden unexpected changes in the life of a family create many different emotions in various family members. The death of a young woman during or after her pregnancy is especially difficult because of the strain it places on family dynamics. One of the consequences is that there is, commonly, a newborn, and perhaps other children, without a mother and caregiver. In families that relied on both parents working, there are financial hardships imposed by the death. There is the emotional void that is felt by her partner, parents, sisters, brothers, and extended family. This extreme stress leads to questions about the death that need to be addressed by the health care providers. If the anger that is part of the grieving process is not adequately resolved, healing cannot occur. It is then that the family may pursue the legal process to help obtain answers about what happened and, more importantly, why it happened to their loved one.