Istituto di Medicina del Lavoro dell'Università Cattolica del S. Cuore, Roma, Italy.
Radiol Med. 2013 Apr;118(3):504-17. doi: 10.1007/s11547-012-0878-7. Epub 2012 Sep 17.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
近年来,介入放射学治疗的应用显著增加,相关医疗纠纷的数量也有所增加。本研究旨在强调介入放射学医疗事故索赔背后的问题,并评估知情同意程序的重要性。
作者从意大利医学放射学会(SIRM)注册的所有放射科医生的保险数据库中,筛选出 1993 年 1 月 1 日至 2006 年 12 月 31 日期间,14 年内放射科医生提出的所有介入放射学治疗相关假定错误的保险索赔,对这些索赔进行了研究。
在所考虑的时间段内,对实施介入放射学治疗的放射科医生提出了 98 项医疗事故索赔。在 21 例(21.4%)中,该事件导致患者死亡。在>80%的情况下,该事件发生在公共医疗机构。从事介入放射学治疗的放射科医生发生医疗事故索赔的风险为每 1000 例 47 例,这相当于每 231 年的执业活动中发生一起医疗事故索赔。
介入放射学是一种与手术相似的生物学风险特征的学科,由于所使用技术的固有问题以及需要对患有严重疾病且临床状况受损的患者进行治疗,因此介入放射学医生面临着很高的医疗法律诉讼风险。
诉讼预防在很大程度上取决于降低医疗差错率和向患者提供正确一致的信息。采用良好的放射实践、严格审查程序和使用仪器的效率,以及对组织和管理流程进行审核,都是有助于降低错误发生概率的因素。在保护患者自主权的同时,提高沟通技巧,还意味着对患者接受医疗程序的知情同意采取明确而严格的程序。