Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Liability, Legal”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 505 records · Page 28Linked to original sources
PubMed1993

Computed tomography before lumbar puncture in acute meningitis: a review of the risks and benefits.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the indications, if any, for routine computed tomography (CT) of the brain before lumbar puncture in the management of acute meningitis. DATA SOURCES: Original research papers, reviews and editorials published in English from 1965 to 1991 were retrieved from MEDLINE. The bibliographies of these articles and of numerous standard texts were examined for pertinent references. A survey of local neurologists was conducted, and legal opinion was sought from the Canadian Medical Protective Association. DATA EXTRACTION: There were no studies directly assessing the risks of lumbar puncture in meningitis; however, all sources were culled for other pertinent information. RESULTS: No cases could be found of patients with acute meningitis deteriorating as a result of lumbar puncture. The neurologic consensus refuted the need for CT in typical acute meningitis. All sources stressed speedy lumbar puncture and the early institution of appropriate antibiotic therapy to minimize the severity of the illness and the risk of death. CONCLUSIONS: (a) There is no evidence to recommend CT of the brain before lumbar puncture in acute meningitis unless the patient shows atypical features, (b) for patients with papilledema the risks associated with lumbar puncture are 10 to 20 times lower than the risks associated with acute bacterial meningitis alone, (c) CT may be necessary if there is no prompt response to therapy for meningitis or if complications are suspected, (d) the inability to visualize the optic fundi because of cataracts or senile miosis is not an indication for CT and (e) there are no Canadian legal precedents suggesting liability if physicians fail to perform CT in cases of meningitis.

Acute Disease↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Liability immunity as a legal defense for recent emergency medical services system litigation.

BACKGROUND: Although many emergency medical services (EMS) providers are concerned about liability litigation, no comprehensive, national studies of EMS appelate cases have been published. Information about these cases and the use of liability immunity (sovereign immunity, emergency medical care immunity, or Good Samaritan immunity) as a defense could be used for EMS risk management and better patient care. OBJECTIVE: To review recent EMS system civil litigation cases to determine their common characteristics and the number that used liability immunity as a legal defense. METHODS: An observational study of the WESTLAW computerized database of legal cases from all state and federal appellate courts. All legal cases that named a member of the EMS system as a defendant, involved either a patient-care incident or ambulance collision, and received an appellate court opinion from 1987 through 1992, were studied. RESULTS: Eighty-six cases were identified and analyzed. Most cases (85%) were related to a patient-care incident, and 71% of the cases involved a death or significant physical injury. More than 49% of the patient cases alleged inadequate assessment or treatment, and 27% alleged delay in ambulance arrival or no ambulance arrival. There were 11 cases (15%) that alleged no transport of the patient to the hospital. Liability immunity was used as a defense in 53% of the cases. The appellate courts ruled in favor of 68% of the defendants that did not use an immunity defense and in favor of 72% of those that did use liability immunity. CONCLUSION: There have been a large number of recent appellate cases involving EMS systems. The common characteristics of many of these cases demonstrate the need for providing rapid ambulance arrival, proper assessment and treatment, and rapid patient transportation to a hospital. Although liability immunity was used as a legal defense by most EMS system defendants, the appellate court outcome was similar regardless of its use.

Defensive Medicine↗
PubMed1998

The legal and ethical aspects of telemedicine. 4: Product liability and jurisdictional problems.

The use of telemedicine brings with it the risk that the human factor--the teleconsultant--will fail to reach the standard of care that the law requires of medical professionals. It also brings the risk that the telemedical equipment or system will fail at a crucial moment. Such risks, of course, are inherent in many aspects of medical care but in telemedicine, at the interface between communications technology and health care, one must consider not only who is liable for failure, but under which country's laws will that liability be determined. This final review article describes the challenges facing manufacturers and their customers in providing safe, properly endorsed telemedicine systems. The problem of which country's laws should apply to a cross-border teleconsultation is also reviewed.

Equipment Safety↗
PubMed2006

[Alcoholic patients: legal responsibility of physicians].

The liability rising from medical cares given to a patient suffering from an addiction to alcohol does not differ from those stemming from cares to other pathologies. The cares must be relevant with regard to state of art, an information as comprehensive as possible must be provided to the patient, on the investigations to be carried out, as well as on the treatments considered. The most difficult thing to achieve is to obtain a full co-operation of the patient, who since the law of March 4, 2002, has the right to refuse a treatment, which cannot be imposed to him. Safeguarding the medical secrecy in particular with regard to the family can be difficult, because of the pressures exerted to obtain the revelation from it. But this revelation of the medical secrecy is authorized by the law only within very precise limits. In very specific circumstances, a doctor can be liable for a criminal offence made by his patient, for instance when he does not prevent his patient to drive a car, while he is obviously drunk.

Alcoholism↗
PubMed2004

Current legal status of advance directives in the United States.

Advance directive legislation has been in place throughout much of the United States for nearly 3 decades. The right to give an informed consent to or refusal of medical treatment has been recognized by state and federal courts, and that right has been determined to survive the loss of decisional capacity and may be exercised through the execution of instructional or proxy directives. Despite these developments, the percentage of the adult population with a formal advance directive of any type has never exceeded 15%. Moreover, a remarkable number of these directives are ambiguous and/or their existence is unknown to the physicians who are expected to rely upon them. Even unambiguous directives may not be followed at the critical stage in the trajectory of a patient's illness, and the accountability for such disregard by health care institutions or professionals is negligible to nonexistent. Nevertheless, there is real potential for advance directives, as a key element to sound advance care planning, to fulfill their initial promise as instruments of the prospective autonomy of patients. In order for that potential to be realized, primary care physicians must embrace advance care planning as a part of their professional responsibility to patients.

Advance Directives↗