Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Medical Liability”

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 649 records · Page 36Linked to original sources
PubMed1990

Medical information, health sciences librarians, and professional liability.

As a gatekeeper to medical literature and a critical link in the delivery of information to physicians, the librarian's role raises the issue of the librarian's professional liability. The paper suggests several ways in which liability may attach to the librarian or the librarian's employers. Although the librarian's personal risk is negligible, the physician's exposure due to ineffective library work is substantial since the courts have held that a physician must keep abreast of progress in his field. Librarians can also become associated with professional liability actions as part of a case against a physician or hospital through the legal doctrine of vicarious liability. The paper concludes by suggesting several proactive steps for health sciences librarians to pursue to insulate themselves from professional liability and to insulate physicians and institutions from vicarious liability.

Information Services↗
PubMed2005

Independent medical examinations: an expanding source of physician liability.

Employers frequently ask physicians to conduct medical examinations and review radiology films and other diagnostic tests of employees. Physicians also provide such services at the request of other third parties. These examinations are commonly called independent medical examinations. Increasingly, patients are bringing and prevailing in medical malpractice lawsuits against physicians who conduct independent medical examinations, in part because of physicians' misconceptions of their legal duties in this context. Despite the absence of a traditional physician-patient relationship, physicians who conduct independent medical examinations still owe various legal duties to the examinee patient, although the precise scope of those duties is a source of constant debate and change. Since 2001 alone, 4 state supreme courts have exercised their discretion to hear cases on this issue, bearing witness to its medical, legal, and social significance. Given the current medical malpractice climate, it is imperative that physicians understand the potential liability inherent in conducting independent medical examinations. This article summarizes controlling law, clarifying an otherwise muddied legal picture. It also offers practical suggestions for limiting physician liability in independent medical examinations.

Confidentiality↗
PubMed1981

Applying antitrust law to medical credentialing.

This Article analyzes the possible antitrust liability of medical credentialing programs by dividing their potentially anticompetitive acts into three categories: (1) communicative behavior--for example, credentialing agencies' promulgation of standards--designed primarily to influence government decision making; (2) communicative behavior designed to influence private decision makers, such as consumers, hospitals, and training programs; and (3) noncommunicative behavior--for example, an agreement by the credentialing agency and others to boycott a group of professionals--that might be used to exclude competitors from various fields of medical care. The author argues that the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution, together with the related Noerr-Pennington doctrine, should exempt from antitrust law any credentialing standard that has been adopted for a good-faith purpose and is at least arguably reasonable. On the other hand, the author also argues that antitrust law should condemn any "sham" standard that in fact is designed to eliminate or to punish competitors, and any other noncommunicative behavior by credentialing agencies for the same purpose.

Accreditation↗
PubMed2004

Professional liability issues in graduate medical education.

Resident physicians, attending physicians, and graduate medical education (GME) institutions share a collective responsibility to deliver safe and appropriate care to patients. The law does not offer concessions in quality of care to accommodate GME. Resident physicians are generally held to the same standard of care as attending physicians in their respective specialties. This principle encourages resident physicians to seek supervision and attending physicians to provide the same. Attending physicians face malpractice exposure not only for the care they provide but also for the care they direct. In addition, they may be held vicariously liable for the negligence of resident physicians working with them, or directly liable for inadequate supervision. What constitutes adequate supervision is unsettled in the law. As the standards in this area evolve, it is reasonable to expect that the profession's and the public's heightened attention to patient safety will continue to move the courts toward higher standards of supervision. GME institutions and programs bear legal responsibility for both the care they deliver and the negligence of their employees. They also face liability for failing to administer safe systems of care. Work hour restrictions and a growing understanding of the role of organizational factors in contributing to and preventing medical injury may increase the legal expectations imposed on GME programs.

Education, Medical, Graduate↗
PubMed2003

Malpractice reform: one state's example.

The medical malpractice liability crisis has resulted in soaring liability costs, the closing of major malpractice insurance companies, and many doctors abandoning the performance of high-risk procedures or medical practice altogether. The article explores how medical malpractice liability was addressed in the State of Pennsylvania, as well as recent attempts at tort reform by the federal government.

Compensation and Redress↗
PubMed1985

Ethical and legal issues related to the use of computer programs in clinical medicine.

As computer programs are used with increasing frequency in the clinical setting, ethicists, lawyers, computer scientists, clinicians, and patients must confront a group of problems: In what situations is it appropriate to use a medical computer program? Who should use these programs and how should they be used? What is the legal status of a computer program that provides medical advice? Can a proper balance be achieved between confidentiality of patient information and shared access to records by health care personnel? How can regulatory agencies, physicians, and patients determine if a program is safe for human use? Will programs be able to communicate with users well enough to prevent clinically harmful misunderstandings? Because few if any definitive answers are yet available, these questions remain the subject of much discussion.

Computers↗
PubMed1993

Practice parameters benefit all. Patient management strategies improve outcomes for patients, lower costs for payers.

Practice parameters, patient management strategies designed to help physicians make clinical decisions, can eliminate thousands of unwarranted medical procedures each year, resulting in greater satisfaction for patients and lower costs for payers. But physicians have yet to adopt many recently issued parameters. The enthusiasm with which they embrace newer guidelines depends on their views concerning the expertise of the sponsoring organization and the participants in the group that developed the parameter. Practice parameter development is costly. Before creating a practice parameter, it is a good idea to find out if a parameter already exists that can be modified for local use, or if one is being developed elsewhere. Some think inertia is a major obstacle to carrying out practice parameter guidelines. Others believe healthcare professionals' opposition is a more substantial roadblock. Some physicians believe practice parameters threaten their autonomy and the art of their practice. Pressure from patients to use certain procedures can also be an obstacle. Practice parameters work best if developed by authoritative physician specialty organizations. Implementation needs to be backed up with continuing education and feedback.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2002

Health care law.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Abortion, Legal↗