Medical malpractice and anesthesiology: literature review and role of the expert witness

Crosby, Edward T.

doi:10.1007/bf03022645

Cited by 16 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The Fourth National Audit Project probably represents the largest ever UK study of complications of anaesthesia and its findings reflect current practice across the breadth of the UK; both the project design and data collection were meticulous as was the review process, conducted by a broad pool of clinical anaesthetists and others. This minimised issues such as hindsight and outcome bias and 'group-thinking' [5,[24][25][26]. Similar methods have been applied in other safety-conscious industries as well as in medicine to identify and correct deficiencies of care [13,27].…”

Section: New Report Same Old Findings?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can we make airway management (even) safer? – lessons from national audit

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe Fourth National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Difficult Airway Society (NAP4) has published an extensive report examining both current practices in the United Kingdom regarding airway management during anaesthesia and the complications of airway management during anaesthesia and in intensive care units and emergency departments. The report makes more than 160 recommendations designed to improve care of patients. These recommendations have implications for individuals, departments, organisations and potentially for national policy in terms of training, standards of practice and the need for guidelines. The report also indicates several specific areas where future research might be directed. This article focuses on the implementation phase of NAP4, emphasising the importance of taking the lessons derived from NAP4 and turning them into actions to improve the safety of airway care delivered to patients, wherever in hospital this takes place.

show abstract

Section: New Report Same Old Findings?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can we make airway management (even) safer? – lessons from national audit

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is well recognised that if two groups review a medicolegal case they each reach consensus quickly; however, those consensus decisions are often different from each other. 8 This likely arises because of most individuals' desire to reach agreement and consensus and perhaps where a group is for example dominated by an alpha member. 9,10 The large group signs off the structured output from each case.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The United Kingdom National Audit Projects: a narrative review

Thomas

Cook

2016

Southern African Journal of Anaesthesia and Analgesia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Royal College of Anaesthetists' National Audit Project (NAP) programme has been running in its current form since 2006. Since NAP3 was commissioned the NAPs have examined rare but important complications of anaesthesia and related subspecialties. The topics covered include major complications of central neuraxial block (NAP3), major complications of airway management in hospitals (NAP4) and accidental awareness during general anaesthesia (NAP5). NAP6 is currently studying severe perioperative anaphylaxis. The NAPs have shed new light on the major complications of anaesthesia, providing both quantitative (frequencies, prevalence, incidence, risk factors) and qualitative (themes, patient stories, human factors) knowledge that has led to new learning, recommendations and changes in practice. This article describes the background, nature and processes of the NAPs.

show abstract

“…Da die absolute Zahl der Anästhesien/Jahr im Bereich der norddeutschen Schlichtungsstelle nicht bekannt ist, können diese Zahlen nur einen Überblick über Art, Verteilung und Schwere von Gesundheitsschäden in der Anästhesiologie geben. Die Ergebnisse vorliegender Untersuchung liegen im Bereich von Studien aus den USA, Kanada und Australien, nach denen 3-7% aller Schadensfälle das Fachgebiet der Anästhesiologie betreffen [7,8,9,10]. Die geringere Häufigkeit im Vergleich z.…”

Section: Interpretation Der Ergebnisseunclassified

“…Eine Darstellung vorrangig der eige- [16,17]. Daher wird bei einem großen Schaden eher ein schuldhaftes ärztliches Fehlverhalten angenommen, obwohl dieser Zusammenhang einer sachlichen Prüfung nicht standhält [9]. Hier zeigt sich besonders deutlich, dass die Gutachter nicht klar zwischen den Bereichen "Fehlerbewertung" und "Kausalitätsbewertung" trennen.…”

Section: Wissenschaftliche Begründung Und Einbeziehung Der Eigenen Meunclassified

Qualität anästhesiologischer Gutachten bei medizinischen Schadensfällen

Hachenberg

Neu²,

Werner

et al. 2012

Anaesthesist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Expert opinions have an important place for expert testimony in medical disputes. The report should contain a summary about facts and causality between the damage and the medical treatment in question as well as describe the current medical standard. The fulfillment of scientific criteria was investigated in 179 anesthesiological expert opinions from 150 arbitration cases. Anesthesiological expert reports (2005-2007) of the Arbitration Board of the North German Medical Associations were analyzed in terms of structure, general form of assessment and scientific substantiation of statements. Patient damage was confirmed in 76%, treatment failure in 29% and negligent malpractice in 17% of the reports. In 78% of the reports the facts were presented correctly and in 64% the question was answered whether the incident would have occurred even during adequate and professional action. Conclusive statements about the causality between the damage and the medical treatment in question were available only in 60% of the reports. The study findings suggest that anesthesia expert reports present a high incidence of non-scientific claims. The development of guidelines for expert witnesses by the medical societies is urgently recommended.

show abstract

Medical malpractice and anesthesiology: literature review and role of the expert witness

Cited by 16 publications

References 67 publications

Can we make airway management (even) safer? – lessons from national audit

Can we make airway management (even) safer? – lessons from national audit

The United Kingdom National Audit Projects: a narrative review

Qualität anästhesiologischer Gutachten bei medizinischen Schadensfällen

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About