A 12-year follow-up study of malpractice claims against radiologists in Italy

被引:31
作者
Fileni, A.
Magnavita, N.
机构
[1] INRCA, Sede Roma, I-00189 Rome, Italy
[2] Univ Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Ist Med Lavoro, Rome, Italy
来源
RADIOLOGIA MEDICA | 2006年 / 111卷 / 07期
关键词
malpractice; radiology; liability; error; clinical risk management;
D O I
10.1007/s11547-006-0099-z
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose. Malpractice claims filed against radiologists have become a relevant phenomenon in Italy and are a real risk in the radiologists' professional activity. Materials and methods. Insurance claims of Italian radiologists over the 1993-2004 period were anonymously assessed. A total of 990 insurance claims were classified according to cause: (1) missed diagnosis, (2) complications of the radiological procedure, (3) failure to order further radiological examinations, (4) radiation treatment, (5) slip-and-fall injuries, (6) miscellaneous causes. Results. A total of 990 claims were filed during the period, with most claims being filed a considerable time after the event. As a consequence. the estimated incidence may be 44 per 1,000. In other words. 44% of Italian radiologists have received, or will receive, a summons regarding their professional activity of the past 10 years. Misdiagnosis made up the first and most important claim category. Missed abnormalities on breast radiographs accounted for the greatest percentage of cases. Missed bone abnormalities were the following most common diagnostic errors. Complications following interventional procedures accounted for 10% of all cases. A few cases resulted from the radiologist's failure to order further diagnostic examinations. Lastly, radiologists were frequently named as one of multiple defendants, together with medical (or surgical) doctors, in cases of patient death in roughly 6% of all cases. Conclusions. The risk of medical malpractice litigation for Italian radiologists is by now comparable to that for American radiologists. Strict adherence to radiological standards may be a means of reducing the risk of legal action and obviating litigation.
引用
收藏
页码:1009 / 1022
页数:14
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]  
Andrieu de Levis P, 1995, J Radiol, V76, P329
[2]   Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists [J].
Barlow, WE ;
Chi, C ;
Carney, PA ;
Taplin, SH ;
D'Orsi, C ;
Cutter, G ;
Hendrick, RE ;
Elmore, JG .
JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2004, 96 (24) :1840-1850
[3]   MALPRACTICE AND RADIOLOGISTS IN COOK-COUNTY, IL - TRENDS IN 20 YEARS OF LITIGATION [J].
BERLIN, L ;
BERLIN, JW .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1995, 165 (04) :781-788
[4]   Errors of omission [J].
Berlin, L .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2005, 185 (06) :1416-1421
[5]   INTERVENTIONAL PROCEDURES OF THE BREAST - MEDICOLEGAL CONSIDERATIONS [J].
BRENNER, RJ .
RADIOLOGY, 1995, 195 (03) :611-615
[6]   MAMMOGRAPHY AND MALPRACTICE LITIGATION - CURRENT STATUS, LESSONS, AND ADMONITIONS [J].
BRENNER, RJ .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1993, 161 (05) :931-935
[7]   Medicolegal aspects of breast cancer in US federal medical facilities: Analysis of 80 claims [J].
Chew, FS ;
OReilly, MAR ;
Schuckenbrock, CM ;
RelyeaChew, A ;
Foley, HT ;
OReilly, PMR .
MILITARY MEDICINE, 1996, 161 (06) :329-333
[8]   Second reading of screening mammograms increases cancer detection and recall rates. Results in the Florence screening programme [J].
Ciatto, S ;
Ambrogetti, D ;
Bonardi, R ;
Catarzi, S ;
Risso, G ;
Del Turco, MR ;
Mantellini, P .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 2005, 12 (02) :103-106
[9]   The role of arbitration of discordant reports at double reading of screening mammograms [J].
Ciatto, S ;
Ambrogetti, D ;
Risso, G ;
Catarzi, S ;
Morrone, D ;
Mantellini, P ;
Del Turco, MR .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 2005, 12 (03) :125-127
[10]   The pathological and radiological features of screen-detected breast cancers diagnosed following arbitration of discordant double reading opinions [J].
Cornford, EJ ;
Evans, AJ ;
James, JJ ;
Burrell, HC ;
Pinder, SE ;
Wilson, ARM .
CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2005, 60 (11) :1182-1187