• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

产科与非产科麻醉医疗事故索赔的比较。

A comparison of obstetric and nonobstetric anesthesia malpractice claims.

作者信息

Chadwick H S, Posner K, Caplan R A, Ward R J, Cheney F W

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle 98195.

出版信息

Anesthesiology. 1991 Feb;74(2):242-9. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199102000-00009.

DOI:10.1097/00000542-199102000-00009
PMID:1990900
Abstract

Malpractice claims filed against anesthesiologists for care involving obstetric (OB) anesthesia (n = 190) were taken from the American Society of Anesthesiologists' Closed Claims Database and compared to claims not involving OB cases (n = 1351). The most common complications in the OB claims were (percentage of all OB claims): maternal death (22%), newborn brain damage (20%), and headache (12%). In contrast, the most common complications in the nonobstetric (non-OB) group were (percentage of all non-OB claims): death (39%), nerve damage (16%), and brain damage (13%). The group of OB claims contained a proportionately greater number of minor injuries, such as headache, backache, pain during anesthesia, and emotional injury (32%) compared to the non-OB claims (4%). Complications due to aspiration and convulsions were more common among the OB cases. The standard of care was judged to have been met in 46% of OB and 39% of non-OB claims. This difference is not statistically significant. Claims involving general anesthesia were more frequently associated with severe injuries and resulted in higher payments than did claims involving regional anesthesia. Payments were made in a similar proportion of OB and non-OB claims (53 and 59%, respectively). For cases in which payments were made, the median payment for OB claims was significantly greater ($203,000) than for non-OB claims ($85,000; P less than or equal to 0.05).

摘要

针对麻醉医生在产科麻醉护理方面提出的医疗事故索赔(n = 190)取自美国麻醉医师协会的封闭索赔数据库,并与不涉及产科病例的索赔(n = 1351)进行比较。产科索赔中最常见的并发症为(占所有产科索赔的百分比):产妇死亡(22%)、新生儿脑损伤(20%)和头痛(12%)。相比之下,非产科组最常见的并发症为(占所有非产科索赔的百分比):死亡(39%)、神经损伤(16%)和脑损伤(13%)。与非产科索赔(4%)相比,产科索赔组中轻伤的比例相对较高,如头痛、背痛、麻醉期间疼痛和精神损伤(32%)。误吸和惊厥导致的并发症在产科病例中更为常见。46%的产科索赔和39%的非产科索赔被判定符合护理标准。这种差异无统计学意义。与区域麻醉相关的索赔相比,涉及全身麻醉的索赔更常与重伤相关,且赔付金额更高。产科和非产科索赔获得赔付的比例相似(分别为53%和59%)。对于已赔付的病例,产科索赔的赔付中位数(203,000美元)显著高于非产科索赔(85,000美元;P≤0.05)。

相似文献

1
A comparison of obstetric and nonobstetric anesthesia malpractice claims.产科与非产科麻醉医疗事故索赔的比较。
Anesthesiology. 1991 Feb;74(2):242-9. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199102000-00009.
2
Injuries associated with regional anesthesia in the 1980s and 1990s: a closed claims analysis.20世纪80年代和90年代与区域麻醉相关的损伤:一项索赔结案分析。
Anesthesiology. 2004 Jul;101(1):143-52. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200407000-00023.
3
Liability associated with obstetric anesthesia: a closed claims analysis.产科麻醉相关的责任:一项结案索赔分析。
Anesthesiology. 2009 Jan;110(1):131-9. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318190e16a.
4
A Contemporary Analysis of Medicolegal Issues in Obstetric Anesthesia Between 2005 and 2015.2005 年至 2015 年产科麻醉中的当代医事法律问题分析。
Anesth Analg. 2019 Jun;128(6):1199-1207. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000003395.
5
The AANA Foundation closed malpractice claims study: obstetric anesthesia.美国麻醉护士协会基金会已结案的医疗事故索赔研究:产科麻醉
AANA J. 2002 Apr;70(2):97-104.
6
ASA closed claims in obstetrics: lessons learned.美国麻醉医师协会产科闭合性索赔案例:经验教训
Anesthesiol Clin North Am. 2003 Mar;21(1):183-97. doi: 10.1016/s0889-8537(02)00051-2.
7
A contemporary medicolegal claims analysis of injuries related to neuraxial anesthesia between 2007 and 2016.2007 年至 2016 年与椎管内麻醉相关的伤害的当代法医学索赔分析。
J Clin Anesth. 2019 Nov;57:66-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2019.03.013. Epub 2019 Mar 12.
8
Eye injuries associated with anesthesia. A closed claims analysis.与麻醉相关的眼部损伤。一项结案索赔分析。
Anesthesiology. 1992 Feb;76(2):204-8. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199202000-00008.
9
What Adverse Events and Injuries Are Cited in Anesthesia Malpractice Claims for Nonspine Orthopaedic Surgery?非脊柱骨科手术麻醉医疗事故索赔中提到了哪些不良事件和损伤?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017 Dec;475(12):2941-2951. doi: 10.1007/s11999-017-5303-z.
10
Injury and liability associated with monitored anesthesia care: a closed claims analysis.与监护麻醉护理相关的损伤及责任:一项索赔结案分析
Anesthesiology. 2006 Feb;104(2):228-34. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200602000-00005.

引用本文的文献

1
POST OPERATIVE PAIN RELIEF IN CAESAREAN SECTION.剖宫产术后疼痛缓解
Med J Armed Forces India. 2001 Jan;57(1):31-4. doi: 10.1016/S0377-1237(01)80086-1. Epub 2011 Jul 21.
2
Analysis of expert consultation referrals for anesthesia-related issues (December 2008-July 2010): KSA legislation committee report.麻醉相关问题专家咨询转诊分析(2008 年 12 月-2010 年 7 月):沙特立法委员会报告。
Korean J Anesthesiol. 2011 Apr;60(4):260-5. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2011.60.4.260. Epub 2011 Apr 26.
3
Interval between decision and delivery by caesarean section-are current standards achievable? Observational case series.
剖宫产决策与分娩之间的间隔时间——当前标准能否实现?观察性病例系列研究
BMJ. 2001 Jun 2;322(7298):1330-3. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7298.1330.
4
Use of an automated anesthesia information system to determine reference limits for vital signs during cesarean section.使用自动化麻醉信息系统确定剖宫产术中生命体征的参考限值。
J Clin Monit Comput. 1998 Dec;14(7-8):491-8. doi: 10.1023/a:1009900810721.
5
Spinal anaesthesia in obstetrics.产科脊髓麻醉
Can J Anaesth. 1995 Dec;42(12):1145-63. doi: 10.1007/BF03015105.
6
Fetal monitoring and anaesthesia for fetal distress.胎儿窘迫的胎儿监测与麻醉
Can J Anaesth. 1993 May;40(5 Pt 2):R74-80. doi: 10.1007/BF03020687.
7
Comparison of the 25-gauge Whitacre with the 24-gauge Sprotte spinal needle for elective caesarean section: cost implications.25号惠塔克针与24号斯普罗特腰麻针用于择期剖宫产的比较:成本影响
Can J Anaesth. 1993 Dec;40(12):1131-5. doi: 10.1007/BF03009601.