This article presents three successfully litigated medical malpractice cases involving emergency physicians and consultants. We discuss the respective case medical diagnoses, as well as established legal principles that determine in a court proceeding which provider will be liable. Specifically, we explain the legal principles of “patient physician relationship” and “affirmative act.”
This article presents three medical-legal cases that define a physician’s duty to warn and include caveats on medical practice within the scope of the law. Some physicians may not recognize that these legal and liability requirements extend not only to physical danger, but also to infectious diseases, medical illness, and drug effects.
In this article we present a case of a patient who received reversal of anticoagulation therapy with factor IX in violation of hospital guidelines. As a direct result, myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke occurred, leaving the patient neurologically debilitated. Factor IX is indicated in the setting of warfarin-induced, life-threatening bleeding.
Malpractice liability systems exist, in part, to provide compensation for medical malpractice, corrective justice for those injured by it, and to incentivize quality care by punishing substandard care. Defensive medicine is loosely defined as practice based primarily on the fear of litigation rather than on expected patient outcomes.
We report a risk management case of a patient with a missed SAH resulting in a fatal outcome. When there are multiple diagnostic strategies, the patient may be involved with shared decision-making. Some of the medical and legal implications of the diagnosis of SAH will be discussed.
Many emergency physicians view informed consent as a necessary component of treatments or procedures to be performed on their patients. When such procedures are necessary, often there is a discussion of risks, benefits and alternatives with forms signed to validate the discussion