McLean Thomas R
Eastern Kansas Health Care System, Leavenworth, KS, USA.
Int J Med Robot. 2006 Dec;2(4):293-8. doi: 10.1002/rcs.109.
Despite the common use of medical devices most health care providers have little understanding how a device alters medical malpractice litigation. Such knowledge will be increasingly valuable as cybersurgery (i.e. remote robotic surgery) becomes routine.
Review of the laws governing products and telecommunication liability.
Litigation after cybersurgery will be complex. In addition to being able to sue physicians and hospitals, patients who sustain an adverse outcome after cybersurgery will have the potential to sue the robotic manufacturer and telecommunication company. Robotics manufacturers can obtain virtual immunity from liability if they elected to place their devices on the market after obtaining [see text]360 per-market approval from the FDA. However, because [see text]360 pre-market approval is expensive and time consuming most medical devices on the market (including the robotic surgical instruments) do not have immunity to products liability. Consequently, after an adverse cybersurgical outcome a manufacturer of a robotic surgical instrument faces liability for failure to warn, design defects, and failure to properly manufacture. As for telecommunication providers, existing law provides them with immunity from liability.
Litigation following cybersurgery will involve multiple defendants who are likely to use "finger pointing" defenses. Accordingly, there will be liability traps associated with providing cybersurgery.
尽管医疗设备被广泛使用,但大多数医疗保健提供者对设备如何改变医疗事故诉讼了解甚少。随着网络手术(即远程机器人手术)变得常规化,这种知识将变得越来越有价值。
审查有关产品和电信责任的法律。
网络手术后的诉讼将很复杂。除了能够起诉医生和医院外,网络手术后出现不良后果的患者还可能起诉机器人制造商和电信公司。如果机器人制造商选择在获得美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)的[见文本]360每个市场批准后将其设备投放市场,他们可以获得几乎免于责任的豁免权。然而,由于[见文本]360上市前批准既昂贵又耗时,市场上的大多数医疗设备(包括机器人手术器械)都不具备产品责任豁免权。因此,在网络手术出现不良后果后,机器人手术器械制造商面临因未提供警告、设计缺陷和制造不当而产生的责任。至于电信提供商,现行法律赋予他们免于责任的豁免权。
网络手术后的诉讼将涉及多个被告,他们可能会使用“互相指责”的辩护策略。因此,提供网络手术存在责任陷阱。