Vaqar Sarosh, Murray Brian, Panesar Mandip
Department of Internal Medicine, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.
Semin Dial. 2014 Sep-Oct;27(5):472-6. doi: 10.1111/sdi.12174. Epub 2013 Dec 12.
The specialty of Nephrology, by virtue of its relationship with the dialysis procedure, is highly vulnerable to litigation. As is the case with all nephrologists, a dialysis unit medical director is not immune to medical malpractice suits, and can be held liable for any act of perceived or potential harm to any dialysis patient, regardless of the director's level of involvement. The medical director, per the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Conditions of Participation, accepts the responsibilities, accountability, and consequent legal liabilities of the quality of the medical care provided to every dialysis patient in the unit. This review is a synopsis of lawsuits filed against medical directors of dialysis units in the past forty years. Six categories of legal actions were noted; medical malpractice, fraudulent claims, self-referral and Stark Law, discrimination, negligence, and violation of patient autonomy and dignity.
肾脏病学专业,由于其与透析程序的关系,极易引发诉讼。与所有肾脏病专家一样,透析单位的医疗主任也不能免于医疗事故诉讼,并且可能会因任何被认为或潜在的对透析患者造成伤害的行为而承担责任,无论主任的参与程度如何。根据医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)的参与条件,医疗主任承担为单位内每位透析患者提供的医疗质量的责任、问责制以及随之而来的法律责任。本综述是对过去四十年针对透析单位医疗主任提起的诉讼的概述。记录了六类法律诉讼;医疗事故、欺诈性索赔、自我转诊和斯塔克法案、歧视、疏忽以及侵犯患者自主权和尊严。