TY - JOUR
T1 - Malpractice claims in interventional radiology: frequency,
characteristics and protective measures
Il contenzioso in radiologia interventistica: frequenza, caratteristiche
ed azioni di tutela
AU - Magnavita, Nicola
AU - Fileni, Adriano
AU - Mirk Fileni, Paoletta
AU - Magnavita, Giulia
PY - 2013
Y1 - 2013
N2 - Purpose. The use of interventional radiology procedures
has considerably increased in recent years, as has the
number of related medicolegal litigations. This study aimed
to highlight the problems underlying malpractice claims in
interventional radiology and to assess the importance of the
informed consent process.
Materials and methods. The authors examined
all insurance claims relating to presumed errors in
interventional radiology filed by radiologists over a
period of 14 years after isolating them from the insurance
database of all radiologists registered with the Italian
Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM) between 1
January1993 and 31 December 2006.
Results. In the period considered, 98 malpractice claims
were filed against radiologists who had performed
interventional radiology procedures. In 21 cases (21.4%),
the event had caused the patient’s death. In >80% of
cases, the event occurred in a public facility. The risk of a
malpractice claim for a radiologist practising interventional
procedures is 47 per 1,000, which corresponds to one
malpractice claim for each 231 years of activity.
Discussion. Interventional radiology, a discipline with a
biological risk profile similar to that of surgery, exposes
practitioners to a high risk of medicolegal litigation both
because of problems intrinsic to the techniques used and
because of the need to operate on severely ill patients with
compromised clinical status.Conclusions. Litigation prevention largely depends on
both reducing the rate of medical error and providing the
patient with correct and coherent information. Adopting
good radiological practices, scrupulous review of
procedures and efficiency of the instruments used and audit
of organisational and management processes are all factors
that can help reduce the likelihood of error. Improving
communication techniques while safeguarding the patient’s
right to autonomy also implies adopting clear and rigorous
processes for obtaining the patient’s informed consent to
the medical procedure.
AB - Purpose. The use of interventional radiology procedures
has considerably increased in recent years, as has the
number of related medicolegal litigations. This study aimed
to highlight the problems underlying malpractice claims in
interventional radiology and to assess the importance of the
informed consent process.
Materials and methods. The authors examined
all insurance claims relating to presumed errors in
interventional radiology filed by radiologists over a
period of 14 years after isolating them from the insurance
database of all radiologists registered with the Italian
Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM) between 1
January1993 and 31 December 2006.
Results. In the period considered, 98 malpractice claims
were filed against radiologists who had performed
interventional radiology procedures. In 21 cases (21.4%),
the event had caused the patient’s death. In >80% of
cases, the event occurred in a public facility. The risk of a
malpractice claim for a radiologist practising interventional
procedures is 47 per 1,000, which corresponds to one
malpractice claim for each 231 years of activity.
Discussion. Interventional radiology, a discipline with a
biological risk profile similar to that of surgery, exposes
practitioners to a high risk of medicolegal litigation both
because of problems intrinsic to the techniques used and
because of the need to operate on severely ill patients with
compromised clinical status.Conclusions. Litigation prevention largely depends on
both reducing the rate of medical error and providing the
patient with correct and coherent information. Adopting
good radiological practices, scrupulous review of
procedures and efficiency of the instruments used and audit
of organisational and management processes are all factors
that can help reduce the likelihood of error. Improving
communication techniques while safeguarding the patient’s
right to autonomy also implies adopting clear and rigorous
processes for obtaining the patient’s informed consent to
the medical procedure.
KW - Interventional radiology · Claims · Radiologists · Damage · Consent · Malpractice · Stress · Medical error · Liability · Ethics
KW - Radiologia interventistica · Denunce · Radiologi · Danno · Consenso · Malpractice · Stress · Errore medico · Responsabilità · Etica
KW - Interventional radiology · Claims · Radiologists · Damage · Consent · Malpractice · Stress · Medical error · Liability · Ethics
KW - Radiologia interventistica · Denunce · Radiologi · Danno · Consenso · Malpractice · Stress · Errore medico · Responsabilità · Etica
UR - http://hdl.handle.net/10807/32434
U2 - 10.1007/s11547-012-0878-7
DO - 10.1007/s11547-012-0878-7
M3 - Article
SN - 0033-8362
VL - 118
SP - 504
EP - 517
JO - LA RADIOLOGIA MEDICA
JF - LA RADIOLOGIA MEDICA
ER -