Medical malpractice litigation related to gastrointestinal endoscopy in Japan: A two-decade review of civil court cases

Hiyama, Toru; Tanaka, Shinji; Yoshihara, Masaharu; Fukuhara, Tatsuma; Mukai, Shuntaro; Chayama, Kazuaki

doi:10.3748/wjg.v12.i42.6857

Cited by 16 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is underlined by the fact that inadequate consent and explanation is often cited as a contributory issue in cases of litigation arising after ERCP [14,15]. In examining patients' responses, UK endoscopists will take comfort from the fact that frank dissatisfaction with the explanation received was reported by less than 2% of patients who responded to the questionnaire, and that the majority recalled being informed of the indication for their ERCP and the associated risk of a complication.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consenting patients for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: results of a survey of 182 UK endoscopists and 2059 of their patients

Williams

Hamlyn

Logan

et al. 2009

European Journal of Gastroenterology &Amp; Hepatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consenting patients for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: results of a survey of 182 UK endoscopists and 2059 of their patients

Williams

Hamlyn

Logan

et al. 2009

European Journal of Gastroenterology &Amp; Hepatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reported claims included esophagoduodenoscopy (44s%), colonoscopy (22s%), endoscopic sphincterotomy (22s%) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (11s%). Most of the claims alleged performance error or lack of informed consent [ 109 ].…”

Section: Medical Negligencementioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Errors and Medical Negligence

Oyebode

2013

Med Princ Pract

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the definition, nature and origins of clinical errors including their prevention. The relationship between clinical errors and medical negligence is examined as are the characteristics of litigants and events that are the source of litigation. The pattern of malpractice claims in different specialties and settings is examined. Among hospitalized patients worldwide, 3-16% suffer injury as a result of medical intervention, the most common being the adverse effects of drugs. The frequency of adverse drug effects appears superficially to be higher in intensive care units and emergency departments but once rates have been corrected for volume of patients, comorbidity of conditions and number of drugs prescribed, the difference is not significant. It is concluded that probably no more than 1 in 7 adverse events in medicine result in a malpractice claim and the factors that predict that a patient will resort to litigation include a prior poor relationship with the clinician and the feeling that the patient is not being kept informed. Methods for preventing clinical errors are still in their infancy. The most promising include new technologies such as electronic prescribing systems, diagnostic and clinical decision-making aids and error-resistant systems.

show abstract

“…Other studies focus more narrowly on specific medical procedures or issues. Hiyama, et al (2006), examine malpractice claims over endoscopies, for instance, while Shimada & Kato (1994) survey anesthesia-related claims. Hamasaki, Takehara, & Hagihara (2008) and Aoki, et al (2008) both study doctor-patient communications in malpractice disputes.…”

Section: Japan-the Scholarshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Universal Health Insurance on Malpractice Claims: The Japanese Experience

Ramseyer¹

2009

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Japanese patients file relatively few medical malpractice claims. Most scholars try to explain this phenomenon by identifying ''faults'' in the Japanese judicial system. Largely, the faults they identify do not exist. Instead, a substantial part of the reason for the malpractice claiming patterns may lie in the national health insurance system. In order to contain the cost of this system, the government suppresses the price it pays for the technologically most sophisticated procedures. Predictably as a result, Japanese doctors have focused instead on more rudimentary care. Yet, for reasons common to many societies, Japanese patients are less apt to sue over rudimentary care. They are more likely to sue over sophisticated care. In part, Japanese patients may bring relatively few malpractice suits because the government has (for reasons of cost) suppressed the volume of the services (namely, highly sophisticated services) that would otherwise generate the most malpractice claims. I explore this issue with a dataset covering all malpractice suits that generated a published district court opinion from 1995 to 2004. 1 Potentially, universal health insurance programs do not just alter the supply and distribution of medical services; potentially, they also shape claiming and litigating behavior in malpractice disputes. After all, the programs reduce the direct cost of medical services to patients. The lower costs boost demand, and-to prevent the drain on the public fisc-the government could (and usually does) respond by suppressing the amounts it pays suppliers.

show abstract

Medical malpractice litigation related to gastrointestinal endoscopy in Japan: A two-decade review of civil court cases

Cited by 16 publications

References 14 publications

Consenting patients for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: results of a survey of 182 UK endoscopists and 2059 of their patients

Consenting patients for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: results of a survey of 182 UK endoscopists and 2059 of their patients

Clinical Errors and Medical Negligence

The Effect of Universal Health Insurance on Malpractice Claims: The Japanese Experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About