Case Management Consultant to Attorneys in Litigated Cases.

ABSTRACT: Rehabilitation nurses possess knowledge and skills that are ideally suited to a variety of roles. This article informs rehabilitation nurses about opportunities to work in private case management for medical-legal cases. A brief overview of the process of litigation gives nurses the context in which case management interventions are needed. Case examples illustrate the services that nurses provide to attorneys and their clients that help obtain needed care and aid in progressing litigation to resolution.

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.

Medicolegal aspects of documentation and the electronic health record / Aspectos medicolegales de la documentación y la historia clínica electrónica

Introduction: The busiest times in the hospital are often met by the greatest challenges in complete and comprehensive documentation of the patient care event. The near complete transition to the Electronic Health Record (EHR) was to be the solution to a host of provider documentation concerns. It is clear the EHR provides reliability, reproducibility, integration, evidence based decision-making, multidisciplinary contribution across the entire healthcare spectrum.Methods: The use of a consensus of expert opinion supplemented by focused literature review allows a balanced evidence based presentation of data. Results: Documentation is not a perfect tool however, as issues with efficiency, reliability, use of shortcut maneuvers and potential for increased medico-legal risk have been raised. The solution is attention to documentation detail, and creation of systems that facilitate excellence. The focus on electronic documentation systems should include continual evaluation, ongoing improvement, involvement of a multidisciplinary patient care team and vendor receptiveness to in EHR development and operations. Conclusion: The most effective use of the EHR as a risk management tool requires documentation knowledge, targeted analysis, product improvement and co-development of clinical-commercial resource.(AU)

Introducción: Los momentos de mayor actividad en el hospital a menudo se enfrentan con los mayores desafíos en cuanto a la documentación completa y exhaustiva del evento de atención al paciente. La transición casi completa a la historia clínica electrónica (HCE) iba a ser la solución a una serie de preocupaciones sobre la documentación de los proveedores. Está claro que la HCE proporciona confiabilidad, reproducibilidad, integración, toma de decisiones basada en la evidencia y contribución multidisciplinaria en todo el espectro de la atención médica.Métodos: El uso de un consenso de opinión de expertos complementado con una revisión de la literatura enfocada permite una presentación equilibrada de los datos basada en la evidencia.Resultados: La documentación no es una herramienta perfecta, ya que se han planteado problemas de eficiencia, confiabilidad, uso de maniobras abreviadas y la posibilidad de un mayor riesgo medicolegal. La solución es la atención al detalle de la documentación y la creación de sistemas que faciliten la excelencia. El enfoque en los sistemas de documentación electrónica debe incluir evaluación continua, mejora continua, participación de un equipo multidisciplinario de atención al paciente y receptividad de los proveedores en el desarrollo y las operaciones de la HCE. Conclusión: El uso más eficaz de la HCE como herramienta de gestión de riesgos requiere conocimiento de la documentación, análisis específicos, mejora del producto y desarrollo conjunto de recursos clínico-comerciales.(AU)

Risk management and empirical study of the doctor-patient relationship: based on 1790 litigation cases of medical damage liability disputes in China.

BACKGROUND: Compensation for medical damage liability disputes (CMDLD) seriously hinders the healthy development of hospitals and undermines the harmony of the doctor-patient relationships (DPR). Risk management in the DPR has become an urgent issue of the day. The study aims to provide a comprehensive description of CMDLD in China and explore its influencing factors, and make corresponding recommendations for the management of risks in the DPR. METHODS: This study extracted data from the China Judgment Online - the official judicial search website with the most comprehensive coverage. Statistical analysis of 1,790 litigation cases of medical damage liability disputes (COMDLD) available from 2015 to 2021. RESULTS: COMDLD generally tended to increase with the year and was unevenly distributed by regions; the compensation rate was 52.46%, the median compensation was 134,900 yuan and the maximum was 2,234,666 yuan; the results of the single factor analysis showed that there were statistically significant differences between the compensation for different years, regions, treatment attributes, and trial procedures (P < 0.05); the correlation analysis showed that types of hospitals were significantly negatively associated with regions (R=-0.082, P < 0.05); trial procedures were significantly negatively correlated with years (R=-0.484, P < 0.001); compensat- ion was significantly positively correlated with years, regions, and treatment attributes (R = 0.098-0.294, P < 0.001) and negatively correlated with trial procedures (R=-0.090, P < 0.01); regression analysis showed that years, treatment attributes, and regions were the main factors affecting the CMDLD (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Years, regions, treatment attributes, and trial procedures affect the outcome of CMDLD. This paper further puts forward relevant suggestions and countermeasures for the governance of doctor-patient risks based on the empirical results. Including rational allocation of medical resources to narrow the differences between regions; promoting the expansion and sinking of high-quality resources to improve the level of medical services in hospitals at all levels; and developing a third-party negotiation mechanism for medical disputes to reduce the cost of medical litigation.

The Impact of the Linear No-threshold Hypothesis on Litigation.

ABSTRACT: As the basis of radiation safety practice and regulations worldwide, the linear no-threshold (LNT) hypothesis exerts enormous influence throughout society. This includes our judicial system, where frivolous lawsuits are filed alleging radiation-induced health effects caused by negligent companies who subject unwitting victims to enormous financial and physical harm. Typically, despite the lack of any supporting scientific basis, these cases result in enormous costs to organizations, insurance companies, and consumers.

A machine learning-based predictive model of causality in orthopaedic medical malpractice cases in China.

PURPOSE: To explore the feasibility and validity of machine learning models in determining causality in medical malpractice cases and to try to increase the scientificity and reliability of identification opinions. METHODS: We collected 13,245 written judgments from PKULAW.COM, a public database. 963 cases were included after the initial screening. 21 medical and ten patient factors were selected as characteristic variables by summarising previous literature and cases. Random Forest, eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) and Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM) were used to establish prediction models of causality for the two data sets, respectively. Finally, the optimal model is obtained by hyperparameter tuning of the six models. RESULTS: We built three real data set models and three virtual data set models by three algorithms, and their confusion matrices differed. XGBoost performed best in the real data set, with a model accuracy of 66%. In the virtual data set, the performance of XGBoost and LightGBM was basically the same, and the model accuracy rate was 80%. The overall accuracy of external verification was 72.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The optimal model of this study is expected to predict the causality accurately.

One thought too few: An adaptive rationale for punishing negligence.

Why do we punish negligence? Some current accounts raise the possibility that it can be explained by the kinds of processes that lead us to punish ordinary harmful acts, such as outcome bias, character inference, or antecedent deliberative choices. Although they capture many important cases, these explanations fail to account for others. We argue that, in addition to these phenomena, there is something unique to the punishment of negligence itself: People hold others directly responsible for the basic fact of failing to bring to mind information that would help them to avoid important risks. In other words, we propose that at its heart negligence is a failure of thought. Drawing on the current literature in moral psychology, we suggest that people find it natural to punish such failures, even when they do not arise from conscious, volitional choice. This raises a question: Why punish somebody for a mental event they did not exercise deliberative control over? Drawing on the literature on how thoughts come to mind, we argue that punishing a person for such failures will help prevent their future occurrence, even without the involvement of volitional choice. This provides new insight on the structure and function of our tendency to punish negligent actions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

An Updated Analysis of Body Contouring Malpractice Cases.

INTRODUCTION: Body contouring procedures are commonly performed in the United States for patients seeking to sculpt specific areas of their bodies. The aim of this study was to provide an updated analysis of the factors that influence medical malpractice litigation surrounding body contouring surgery. METHODS: The following terms were used to search the Westlaw Campus Legal research Database for cases with earliest documentation after January 2013: ("contouring" OR "abdominoplasty" OR "liposuction" OR "tummy tuck" OR "body lift" OR "thigh lift" OR "arm lift" OR "brachioplasty" OR "thighplasty" OR "lipectomy" OR "panniculectomy") AND "surgery" AND "medical malpractice." Cases were only included if there was a complaint of medical malpractice subsequent to a body contouring procedure, and details of the cases were provided. Information was collected on the location of the lawsuit, the earliest year of available case documentation, patient demographics, procedure(s) performed, alleged injury, specialty involvement, and verdicts. RESULTS: A total of 32 cases were included in the study. Most of the patients involved in the cases were women (n = 30, 93.8%) and alive (n = 28, 87.5%). New York state had the most cases (n = 7, 21.9%). Abdominoplasty (56.3%), liposuction (53.1%), and buttock augmentations (15.6%) were the most common procedures. Plastic surgeons were involved in 93.8% (n = 30) of the cases, and anesthesia, emergency medicine, dermatology, and oncology were also involved. Claims of malpractice most often discussed negligent technique (71.9%) and poor postoperative management (62.5%). Common postoperative complications were infection/sepsis (40.6%), scarring (31.3%), and emotional distress/prolonged pain (31.3%). One available ruling was in favor of the plaintiff. CONCLUSION: Although many of the cases in this analysis cited negligent technique, none were founded in their argument. Because involvement in these cases can place a burden on attending physicians, clear expectations of postoperative infections, scarring, and prolonged pain should be addressed during the informed consent process.

Assessment of Claimant, Clinical, and Financial Characteristics of Teleradiology Medical Malpractice Cases.

Background The increasing use of teleradiology has been accompanied by concerns relating to risk management and patient safety. Purpose To compare characteristics of teleradiology and nonteleradiology radiology malpractice cases and identify contributing factors underlying these cases. Materials and Methods In this retrospective analysis, a national database of medical malpractice cases was queried to identify cases involving telemedicine that closed between January 2010 and March 2022. Teleradiology malpractice cases were identified based on manual review of cases in which telemedicine was coded as one of the contributing factors. These cases were compared with nonteleradiology cases that closed during the same time period in which radiology had been determined to be the primary responsible clinical service. Claimant, clinical, and financial characteristics of the cases were recorded, and continuous or categorical data were compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test or Fisher exact test, respectively. Results This study included 135 teleradiology and 3474 radiology malpractices cases. The death of a patient occurred more frequently in teleradiology cases (48 of 135 [35.6%]) than in radiology cases (685 of 3474 [19.7%]; P < .001). Cerebrovascular disease was a more common final diagnosis in the teleradiology cases (13 of 135 [9.6%]) compared with the radiology cases (124 of 3474 [3.6%]; P = .002). Problems with communication among providers was a more frequent contributing factor in the teleradiology cases (35 of 135 [25.9%]) than in the radiology cases (439 of 3474 [12.6%]; P < .001). Teleradiology cases were more likely to close with indemnity payment (79 of 135 [58.5%]) than the radiology cases (1416 of 3474 [40.8%]; P < .001) and had a higher median indemnity payment than the radiology cases ($339 230 [IQR, $120 790-$731 615] vs $214 063 [IQR, $66 620-$585 424]; P = .01). Conclusion Compared with radiology cases, teleradiology cases had higher clinical and financial severity and were more likely to involve issues with communication. © RSNA, 2024 See also the editorial by Mezrich in this issue.

Patients' Suits Against Psychiatrists for Not Preventing the Patients' Criminal Acts.

Patients who allege negligent treatment by their psychiatrists can sue to be compensated for the harms they experience. But what if the harms result from a criminal act committed by the patient that the patient claims the psychiatrist should have prevented? A long-standing common law rule bars plaintiffs from being compensated for harms caused by their own wrongdoing. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania recently considered the scope of this rule in the case of a psychiatric patient convicted of murder. Even when the rule is upheld, various exceptions may exist, and there is pressure to do away with an absolute bar on recovery of damages.