Medicina de urgencias y emergencias: ¿una especialidad de riesgo de reclamación? / Emergency medicine: a specialty at risk for malpractice claims?

No disponible

Análisis empírico de la litigiosidad judicial por responsabilidad médica en la asistencia sanitaria pública urgente en España / Empirical analysis of medical malpractice litigation involving urgent-care settings in the Spanish national health service

Objetivo. Analizar las características de las sentencias sobre responsabilidad médica en España en la asistencia sanita- ria pública urgente, dictadas en la jurisdicción contencioso-administrativa por los Tribunales Superiores de Justicia. Método. Estudio observacional transversal que analizó las sentencias entre 2008 y 2020 en la asistencia urgente. Se incluyeron variables administrativas, clínicas, judiciales y de cuantía indemnizatoria. Resultados. Se analizaron 1.015 sentencias, de las que 243 (23,9%) se refirieron a una asistencia urgente. La mayoría se refería a pacientes mayores de edad, 223 (91,8%). La especialidad más implicada fue Medicina de Urgencias y Emergencias 97 (39,9%) y el ámbito más frecuente fue el hospitalario 211 (86,8%). El 64,6% de las sentencias fueron íntegramente desestimatorias. Los motivos de sentencia condenatoria más habituales fueron la mala praxis diagnóstica o terapéutica 40 (46,0%), y la pérdida de oportunidad 35 (40,2%). Los daños más reclamados fueron secuelas 122 (50,2%) y fallecimiento 112 (46,1%). La mediana de las indemnizaciones fue 46.000 euros, intervalo: 1.300-974.849. Conclusiones. La mayoría de las sentencias recaídas en la resolución de reclamaciones profesionales médico-sanitarias son íntegramente desestimatorias. Este dato, que era desconocido hasta el momento en la medicina pública, puede con- tribuir a enmarcar la sobrestimación del riesgo legal en la asistencia urgente. Así mismo, refuerza la idea de la necesidad de aumentar la formación de los profesionales en los aspectos médico-legales de la asistencia sanitaria.

Background and objective. To analyze the characteristics of superior court decisions in litigation or administrative procedures for medical malpractice claims involving urgent care settings in the Spanish national health service. Methods. Observational cross-sectional study of judicial rulings handed down between 2008 and 2020 in cases involving urgent care. We analyzed administrative, clinical, and judicial variables as well as the amounts of compensation awarded. Results. A total of 1015 rulings were analyzed; 243 cases (23.9%) involved urgent medical care. Most cases (223 [91.8%]) involved elderly patients. The largest proportion of defendants (97 [39.9%]) were emergency physicians, and the most common setting was a hospital emergency department (211 [86.8%]). The grounds for finding against the defendant were most often diagnostic or therapeutic error (40 [46.0%] cases) and lost opportunity (35 [40.2%] cases). Damages were usually claimed for sequelae (122 [50.2%] cases) and death (112 [46.1%] cases). The median award was €46 000, the minimum was €1300, and the maximum was €974 849. Conclusions. In medical and other health-care malpractice cases, the majority of claims (about 64%) are dismissed. This finding, unreported until now, may help to contain the overestimation of risk of liability in urgent medical care. It also reinforces the need to provide medical practitioners with more training regarding the legal aspects of health care.

College complaints against resident physicians in Canada: a retrospective analysis of Canadian Medical Protective Association data from 2013 to 2017.

BACKGROUND: An understanding of regulatory complaints against resident physicians is important for practice improvement. We describe regulatory college complaints against resident physicians using data from the Canadian Medical Protective Association (CMPA). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of college complaint cases involving resident doctors closed by the CMPA, a mutual medicolegal defence organization for more than 100 000 physicians, representing an estimated 95% of Canadian physicians. Eligible cases were those closed between 2008 and 2017 (for time trends) or between 2013 and 2017 (for descriptive analyses). To explore the characteristics of college cases, we extracted the reason for complaint, the case outcome, whether the complaint involved a procedure, and whether the complaint stemmed from a single episode or multiple episodes of care. We also conducted a 10-year trend analysis of cases closed from 2008 to 2017, comparing cases involving resident doctors with cases involving only nonresident physicians. RESULTS: Our analysis included 142 cases that involved 145 patients. Over the 10-year period, college complaints involving residents increased significantly (p = 0.003) from 5.4 per 1000 residents in 2008 to 7.9 per 1000 in 2017. While college complaints increased for both resident and nonresident physicians over the study period, the increase in complaints involving residents was significantly lower than the increase across all nonresident CMPA members (p < 0.001). For cases from the descriptive analysis (2013-2017), the top complaint was deficient patient assessment (69/142, 48.6%). Some patients (22/145, 15.2%) experienced severe outcomes. Most cases (135/142, 97.9%) did not result in severe physician sanctions. Our classification of complaints found 106 of 163 (65.0%) involved clinical problems, 95 of 163 (58.3%) relationship problems (e.g., communication) and 67 of 163 (41.1%) professionalism problems. In college decisions, 36 of 163 (22.1%) had a classification of clinical problem, 66 of 163 (40.5%) a patient-physician relationship problem and 63 of 163 (38.7%) a professionalism problem. In 63 of 163 (38.7%) college decisions, the college had no criticism. INTERPRETATION: Problems with communication and professionalism feature prominently in resident college complaints, and we note the potential for mismatch between patient and health care provider perceptions of care. These results may direct medical education to areas of potential practice improvement.

Medical malpractice in aortic valve and mitral valve replacement surgery in North America.

BACKGROUND: Aortic and mitral valve replacement are commonly performed by cardiovascular surgeons, but little data quantitatively analyzes the etiology and prevalence of medical malpractice litigations involving these operations. This study aims to analyze incidence, cause, and resolution of medical malpractice lawsuits involving aortic and mitral valve replacements, alone and in combination with coronary artery bypass and/or aortic procedures. METHODS: The Westlaw legal database was utilized to compile relevant litigations across the United States from 1994-2019. Clinical data, verdict data, demographic data, and litigation attributes were compiled. Fisher's Exact Tests and Mann-Whitney tests were performed for statistical analyses. One hundred four malpractice litigations involving aortic valve replacement and 55 litigations involving mitral valve replacement were included in this analysis. The mean age of patients was 55.2 years and proportion of female patients was 32.7% in aortic valve replacements litigations, compared to a mean age of 54.1 years and female patients in 61.8% of mitral valve replacements litigations. RESULTS: Significant relationships exist between an alleged failure to monitor the patient and defendant verdicts (P=0.01), delayed treatment and defendant verdicts (P=0.04), and incidence of infective endocarditis and plaintiff verdicts (P=0.04) in aortic valve replacement litigations. Similarly, significant relationships exist between an alleged failure to diagnose and settlement verdicts (P=0.047), and stroke incidence and defendant verdicts (P=0.03) in mitral valve replacement litigations. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to excellent surgeon patient/family communication, administering surgical treatment in a timely manner, diagnosing acting on concomitant medical conditions, and close patient monitoring may diminish medical malpractice litigation involving aortic and mitral valve replacement operations.

[Dutch medical disciplinary law cases concerning psychiatry, 2015-2019]. / Uitspraken van regionale tuchtcolleges in zaken betreffende de psychiatrie, 2015-2019.

BACKGROUND: The aim of medical disciplinary law (as part of the Dutch law 'Wet BIG') is to safeguard the quality of professional practice in the health services. Quantitative data about Dutch medical disciplinary law is sparse: little is known about the nature, quantity and the verdicts of disciplinary law complaints against psychiatrists and residents. AIM: Gaining insight in Dutch medical disciplinary law, in particular with regard to number and nature of disciplinary law complaints against psychiatrists(-psychotherapist) and psychiatry residents. METHOD: Descriptive retrospective study. We examined all medical disciplinary law cases against psychiatrists(-psychotherapist) and psychiatry residents in the period 2015-2019. RESULTS: In the study period the regional medical disciplinary courts handled 353 cases against psychiatrists(-psychotherapist) and residents psychiatry, on average 70.6 per year. 321 of these cases were against psychiatrists and 32 against residents. Complaint density was 1.74 for psychiatrists and 0.37 for residents. Subject of most cases was 'wrong diagnosis', followed by 'wrong therapeutic plan' and 'incorrect communication'. The number of cases resulting in a disciplinary measure was on average 31%: warning (49%), reprimand (30%), (conditional) suspension (15%). In 17 cases the professional was (partially) denied to practice. CONCLUSIONS Within Dutch psychiatry little attention is paid to disciplinary law, despite the fact that psychiatrists are relatively often confronted with disciplinary law complaints. The current explorative analysis underlines the need for further research, especially on the difference between male/female psychiatrists and an international comparison with respect to complaints about (sexual) misconduct.

The outcome of applications for restoration to the Medical Register following disciplinary erasure.

In the period 1 January 2012 to 30 June 2020, 76 doctors whose names/entries had been erased from the UK Medical Register by a disciplinary tribunal applied for restoration, and 23 out of 76 (30.3%) applications granted. In 5 of the 53 of those refused restoration, the tribunal suspended indefinitely the right to make further applications. The most frequent reasons for refusal were failure to demonstrate insight (seen in 96%), failure to demonstrate remediation (seen in 79%), and failure to demonstrate that knowledge and skills were up to date (24.5%). Success was more common in UK graduate applications (14/29 - 48.3%) than non-UK graduate applications (9/37 - 24.3%), and in those legally represented (16/29 - 55.2%) than in those without legal representation (7/29 - 24.1%), but the data does not indicate the reasons for these differences. Disciplinary erasure need not necessarily be for life as doctors who learn from their experience, change their ways, and provide evidence of genuine insight and remediation along with up to date knowledge and skills can successfully be reinstated on the register.

Aspectos éticos de las periciales en la valoración de la praxis médica / Ethical aspects of the experts in the evaluation of medical praxis

Los médicos que realizan actividades médico-periciales deben o debemos detenernos a reflexionar sobre nuestra propia tarea, sobre los valores que desarrollamos, sobre el servicio que aportamos a la sociedad, sobre los fines que perseguimos, las consecuencias que podemos llegar a soportar, etc., y cómo orientar nuestra práctica hacia la calidad y la excelencia. En el entorno de la medicina pericial se hace necesaria esta reflexión, para tratar de evitar que determinados criterios o cuestiones sustituyan en buena medida al compromiso responsable con nuestra actitud médica, y que podamos llegar a dejar de lado los elementos que legitiman nuestra acción, en pro de un beneficio o de una labor de intercambio de servicios que es al menos digna de ser analizada en nuestro ámbito

Physicians who carry out medical-expert activities must pause to reflect on our work, on the values we develop, on the service we provide to society, on the goals we pursue, the consequences we can endure, etc., and how to guide our practice towards quality and excellence. In the area of expert medicine, this reflection is necessary, to prevent certain criteria or questions largely replacing responsible commitment with our medical attitude, and get rid of the elements that legitimize our action, in favour of a benefit or exchange of services that is at least worthy of being analysed in our field

LWP update 4: towards a 'fitness to practise' regime.

In this article exploring some of the key recommendations from the RCVS Legislation Working Party (LWP), RCVS registrar and director of legal services Eleanor Ferguson discusses disciplinary reform.

Medical negligence laws and virtual reality in healthcare.

BACKGROUND: As technological innovation increases the availability of novel therapeutic options in general practice, healthcare professionals will need to equip themselves with a sound understanding of their professional legal duties in light of emerging medical technologies, including virtual reality (VR). OBJECTIVE: Using a case study of VR to augment analgesia in burn treatment, this article examines how medical negligence laws apply to the use of new technology in healthcare settings. DISCUSSION: While there is currently no positive duty on healthcare professionals to use VR when treating patients, healthcare professionals may be held liable for harm arising from negligent advice or treatment using VR technology. The case study illustrates the flexible nature of negligence principles in adapting to harms arising from new risks such as simulation sickness. Specific warnings and standards of best practice will need to be developed if VR becomes a feature of general practice.

The medico-legal implications in medical malpractice claims during Covid-19 pandemic: Increase or trend reversal?

The Covid-19 pandemic caused a marked increase in admissions to intensive care units. The critically ill patients' condition from the infection resulted in their deaths. The healthcare facilities have got into trouble because of the pandemic. In fact, they had to create additional beds in a very short time and to protect health workers with personal protective equipment. Healthcare professionals fear that there will be an increase in complaints and medico-legal malpractice claims and hence they have urged politicians to discuss this. The Italian Parliament recently debated the topic of medical liability and passed the Decree-Law no. 18 of 17 March 2020 (DL - so called Cura Italia) by which they want to extend the concept of "gross negligence" to healthcare facilities. Several Extended Care Units have suffered from outbreaks of Covid-19, so the Prosecutor's Office of several cities initiated investigations against them. This situation has reached Sicily, where the Prosecutor's Office of Palermo has opened an inquiry against an Extended Care Unit. Simultaneously, the Covid-19 pandemic may change patients' attitudes towards healthcare professionals, who are risking their lives daily. So the Italian medico-legal community is debating these questions, with one last pending question remaining: is the number of medico-legal claims likely to increase or trend down?

The Current State of Opioid Prescribing and Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) Action Against Physicians: An Analysis of DEA Database 2004-2017.

BACKGROUND: Prescribing opioids has become a challenge. The US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have become more involved, culminating in the March 2016 release of the CDC's "Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain." OBJECTIVES: Given the new guidelines, we wanted to see if there have been any changes in the numbers, demographics, physician risk factors, charges, and sanctions involving the DEA against physicians who prescribe opioids, when compared to a previous DEA database review from 1998 to 2006. STUDY DESIGN: This study involved an analysis of the DEA database from 2004 to 2017. SETTING: The review was conducted at the Henry Ford Health System Division of Pain Medicine. METHOD: After institutional review board approval at Henry Ford Health System, an analysis of the DEA database of criminal prosecutions of physician registrants from 2004-2017 was performed. The database was reviewed for demographic information such as age, gender, type of degree (doctor of medicine [MD] or doctor of osteopathic medicine [DO]), years of practice, state, charges, and outcome of prosecution (probation, sentencing, and length of sentencing). An internet-based search was performed on each registrant to obtain demographic data on specialty, years of practice, type of medical school (US vs foreign), board certification, and type of employment (private vs employed). RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2017, Pain Medicine (PM) had the highest percentage of in-specialty action at 0.11% (n = 5). There was an average of 18 prosecutions per year vs 14 in the previous review. Demographic risk factors for prosecution demonstrated the significance of the type of degree (MD vs. DO), gender, type of employment (private vs. employed), and board certification status for rates of prosecution. Having a DO degree and being male were associated with significantly higher risk as well as being in private practice and not having board certification (P < .001). In terms of type of criminal charges as a percent of cases, possession with intent to distribute (n = 90) was most prevalent, representing 52.3% of charges, with new charges being prescribing without medical purpose outside the usual course of practice (n = 71) representing 41.3% of charges. Comparison of US graduates (MD/DO) vs. foreign graduates showed higher rates of DEA action for foreign graduates but this was of borderline significance (P = .072). LIMITATIONS: State-by-state comparisons could not be made. Specialty type was sometimes self-reported, and information on all opioid prosecutions could not be obtained. The previous study by Goldenbaum et al included data beyond DEA prosecution, so direct comparisons may be limited. CONCLUSION: The overall risk of DEA action as a percentage of total physicians is small but not insignificant. The overall rates of DEA prosecution have increased. New risk factors include type of degree (DO vs. MD) and being in private practice with a subtle trend toward foreign graduates at higher risk. With the trend toward less prescribing by previously high-risk specialties such as Family Medicine, there has been an increase in the relative risk of DEA action for specialties treating patients with pain such as PM, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, neurology, and neurosurgery bearing the brunt of prosecutions. New, more subtle charges have been added involving interpretation of the medical purpose of opioids and standard of care for their use. KEY WORDS: Certification, CDC, criminal, DEA, opioid, prescribing, prosecution, sanctions.

Denuncias por responsabilidad profesional médica en Barcelona (2004-2009). Análisis médico-forense / Medical professional liability claims in Barcelona (2004-2009). Medico-legal analysis

En los últimos años ha habido un incremento de reclamaciones contra médicos por presunta mala praxis. Nuestro objetivo ha sido analizar retrospectivamente las denuncias por responsabilidad médica en los juzgados de Barcelona durante los años 2004-2009, evaluadas en el Instituto de Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses de Cataluña. MATERIAL Y MÉTODO: Se realizó a partir de 3 bases de datos: la primera, las 283 periciales elaboradas por los médicos forenses durante estos años; la segunda, el programa informático judicial TEMIS-2; y la tercera, revisión de sentencias judiciales. RESULTADOS: En 257 casos (90,81%) la reclamación fue penal, 18 (6,36%) procedimientos contencioso-administrativos, 5 civiles (1,77%) y 3 de Fiscalía (1,06%). La edad media fue de 48,38 años (DE±19,39), en el 62,77% la perjudicada fue una mujer, siendo estas las que sufrieron más secuelas. En el 88,34% la reclamación era contra un médico, siendo la más habitual el mal resultado terapéutico (32,86%). Las especialidades más denunciadas fueron la traumatología, obstetricia y ginecología y cirugía general. Hubo más reclamaciones en la sanidad privada. En el 72,41% de los casos que llegaron a juicio la sentencia fue absolutoria y de los 8 que fueron condenados, solo en uno hubo prisión. La mediana del tiempo hasta la sentencia fue de 1.602 días. CONCLUSIONES: La vía penal es la más frecuente. Las mujeres reclaman más y sufren más secuelas. Las especialidades quirúrgicas son las más denunciadas. En el 27,59% de los casos que llegaron a juicio hubo sentencias condenatorias y solo en uno privación de libertad

In recent years there has been an increase in claims against doctors for alleged malpractice. Our objective was to retrospectively analyze complaints of medical liability in the courts of Barcelona between 2004-2009, evaluated at the Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences of Catalonia. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We used 3 databases: the first, the 283 forensic reports prepared by forensic doctors during those years; the second, the judicial computer programme TEMIS-2; and the third, a review of judicial sentences. RESULTS: In 257 cases (90.81%) the claim was criminal, 18 (6.36%) contentious-administrative proceedings, 5 civil (1.77%) and 3 Prosecutor's Office claims (1.06%). The average age was 48.38 years (SD±19.39), in 62.77% the injured party was a woman, and they suffered more sequelae. In 88.34% the claim was against a doctor, a poor therapeutic outcome being the most common (32.86%). The most reported specialties were traumatology, obstetrics and gynaecology, and general surgery. There were more complaints in private healthcare. In 72.41% of the cases that came to trial the sentence was acquittal, and of the 8 convictions, only one was imprisoned. The median time to sentencing was 1,602 days. CONCLUSIONS: The criminal route is the most frequent. Women claim more and suffer more consequences. Surgical specialties are the most reported. In 27.59% of the cases that came to trial there were convictions, and only one resulted in deprivation of liberty