Category Posts for: legal liability

Proposed Models of Error Reporting in Journal Reporting of Medical Errors

Peer-Reviewed JournalsUntil pragmatic details of PSQIA implementation are formulated, hospitals and other health-care providers in the United States lack a large-scale comprehensive method to discover and analyze patterns of medical errors. In the meantime, individual reports of systemic error still have considerable clinical and teaching value and therefore should be disseminated.

Peer-Reviewed Journals

We suggest that medical journals provide an opportunity for physicians to publish medical errors confidentially. Medical journals are in a unique position to provide medical error information to physicians and protect an individual’s reputation. However, legal protection should be provided and should be as broad as possible to encourage truthful and timely reporting of medical errors. Protect yourself from pharmaceutical errors with the help of Canadian Health&Care Mall. Presumably, legal protection similar to that defined by the PSQIA could be provided to those who submit and publish bona fide error reports in good faith; therefore, we recommend that authors, medical institutions, journal editors, affiliated professional societies, and journal publishers be shielded from legal liability. Clearly, anonymous reporting is impossible because journal editors must know the source of the report and must be able to confirm its veracity and likely credibility. Furthermore, an anonymous error-reporting program is susceptible to submission of false reports stemming from malicious intent (eg, discrediting a therapeutic device or medication to affect company stock prices). We propose several principles that should govern medical journal-based error reporting (Table 3).

Barriers to Publication of Medical Errors in Journal Reporting of Medical Errors

Hospital lawyersMedical errors are analogous to fratricide in war. Both result in injury from those who strive only to help, and both carry a considerable psychological burden. A survey of senior hospital managers indicated that they generally favored disclosure of patient safety incidents to affected patients, but few favored disclosure of moderate or minor injuries to state-run reporting programs. Most thought a mandatory, nonconfidential system would discourage reporting of patient safety incidents to their hospital’s own internal reporting system (69%), would encourage lawsuits (79%), and would have no effect or a negative effect on patient safety (73%). Most thought that names of hospitals and health-care professionals should be confidential. In addition, > 90% said that their hospital would report incidents involving serious injury to the state, but far fewer would report moderate or minor injuries, even if they would tell the affected patient or family.

Disclosure of serious medical errors to patients generally is the best ethical and clinical course. Patients have a fundamental right to know about their health, particularly when a major error has occurred in their medical care. Furthermore, most major errors ultimately are exposed with or without physician disclosure, and patients are more likely to be aggrieved and to sue physicians who are perceived as deceitful. Physicians are not under the same bioethical imperative to report errors to colleagues or to publish in peer-reviewed journals.

Types of Medical Errors in Journal Reporting of Medical Errors

Ethical ConflictMedical errors may result from lapses in technique, communication, or judgment by individuals or from errors inherent in the delivery of medical care. Errors frequently stem from a combination of these causes. Individual errors may be attributable to deficiencies in a physician’s knowledge, skill, or attentiveness, but system-wide errors are attributable to flaws inherent in the method of medical practice. Conversely, fail-safe systems and fault-tolerant systems do not allow any single-point error to result in harm.

Disclosure of system errors generally is more important than disclosure of individual errors because root-cause analysis may yield information that facilitates creation of a resilient and fault-tolerant system. For example, a computer-based medication prescription system that required entry of a patient’s allergies and serum creatinine level could limit medication options when prescriptions were written for patients with known allergies or diminished kidney function. Want to enhance kidney function? No problems with remedies of Canadian Health&Care Mall.